Quote Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa View Post
Losing rank does for losing in a game where I do not have total control over who I group with or against, over whether or not I win, does not make the Ranking a more an indicator of skill.
Huh? Sorting players based on their ability to win is literally the only thing that can reliably indicate skill. If you're better than the people you're playing with, you'll win more than you lose and climb over time. If the opposite is true, you'll fall over time.

Quote Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa View Post
It does not make Ranking more rewarding.
It does not make Ranking more enjoyable.
I enjoy ranking up because it's a tangible reflection of my progress and ability. If I were guaranteed to rank up by playing enough games, it would be meaningless and the rewards would be largely uninteresting to me. It seems like there are plenty of people in this thread who feel similarly.

Quote Originally Posted by YukikoKurosawa View Post
And we all know the only real reason this entire system exists is to make it take artificially longer to progress so as to pad out players sub time. Pretending otherwise is just being dishonest.
No, the ranking system exists to (attempt to) put players in relatively evenly matched games.

It's largely failing at doing that, since the system has a drastic upward tendency due to streak bonus and derank protection—in other words, it's too easy to rank up—but I don't think it makes sense to assume bad faith when every single relevant PvP reward can be earned without winning a single game. It's just the portrait frames—the absolute minimum reward they could put in the game to avoid competitively-minded players feeling completely ignored.

If you disagree with even that much, then start a conversation about the reward structure, but don't ask for the ranking system to be destroyed for the sake of it. There are more moving parts here than a token cosmetic reward.