No rated games with unlimited time control.

I don't see why unlimited time games wouldn't be rated. It was the standard control of the pre-modern era. One of Paul Morphy's opponents once thought for so long he had to come back the next day. It would serve an actual function for very busy people. If there was an adjourn button it would indicate to the opponent not to just wait there, but come back later. Correspondence is something like that but they always come back the next day whereas unlimited is a live game. You could even add the feature that logoff causes forfeiture. People like me refuse to acknowledge the clock because it interferes with the best solutions.

My rate doest gain and lost

It's not a control. It's a lack of control.

Why would playing without a clock be considered a live game? It is the longest correspondence game possible. And there is absolutely no incentive to make a move on a losing position. And with no players losing, there is no players winning.

Rating for untimed games is completely irrelevant.

@Cathjake15 said in #2:
> My rate doest gain and lost

Some self-reflection is in order.

@nadjarostowa said in #4:
> Why would playing without a clock be considered a live game? It is the longest correspondence game possible. And there is absolutely no incentive to make a move on a losing position. And with no players losing, there is no players winning.
>
> Rating for untimed games is completely irrelevant.

Well said. It's indeed completely pointless, because people can just decide to never make a move, forcing the player that's (potentially) on the winning side to resign if he wants to get rid of the game. Which means... well, the losing side wins rating points for doing nothing. That's unfair right? That's not what rating was made for. You can just decide to never make a move while in a losing position and then, eventually, the winning side will want to get rid of the game, thus having to resign. Not fit for rated games.

I think it's just thought to be better over all by lichess.

I already explained that no clock was the pre-modern format and they were obviously live games. I've also explained that logoff resulting in forfeiture would prove it. So if you're not even taking my comment into account when you come to forums to be contrary for some strange reason, then your reply can't be taken the least bit seriously when it refuses to acknowledge the original post. People who try to impose their will in chess just seem to fall apart over the board and in conversation.

@The-Mysterious-Hand said in #1:
> Correspondence is something like that but they always come back the next day whereas unlimited is a live game.

What makes you think people will not come back the next day ( or even next week ) In unlimited games?

So you want a game mode where there is no clock but as soon as someone logs out they instantly lose.

So say someone is mated in one but refuses to move and just keeps the game page alive forever. You expect the opponent who is winning to do the same to gain a few points. And when this does not happen, the opponent gives up and resigns, you simply ignore or don't care of the consequences this has to the rating system.

Not to mention hordes of angry users yelling at Lichess for allowing infinite stalling.