First of all we'd like to thank Sunshine_Alaska, who in her post # 11534 understood exactly our point of view, and thanked us for the hard work we have put into these new, quarterly ratings. It is always gratifying when people take the time to actually show their appreciation for what we are trying to do.
When we put in place the new system of quarterly "resets", we tied the seeds into this because it was the only way the system wanted to work. The programming team has since devised a workaround, so it can be set either way.
We have listened carefully to your feedback, in here and via IM, and we have decided that the majority think it is better to keep the seedings based on the lifetime rankings. This is particularly true because, admittedly, the new system wouyld have created a shambles when applied to masters/intermediate/beginners tourneys, with masters just returning to action after a layoff relegated to beginner tourney slots. Clearly, this is not a good idea.
Accordingly, we are adjusting the system so seeds in "rated seeding" tourneys will be allocated in the same manner they always have been. The new feature is just that, an added benefit for Elite players that will allow them to compare their performances realistically within limited time-frames.
We'd like to mention, by the way, that leagues will be able to set up end-of-quarter, invitational tourneys based on any of the criteria in these quarterly ratings. For example, we might have a tourney for those who have played the most matches in the last quarter, or one for those with the highest winning percentage, or of course for (say) the top 50 ratings that quarter.
So, you can see, this will be a great thing for all of us.