[@Innue]I feel this kind of system would bring too much complexity to an otherwise simple game.
100 points per win is enough.
The only question is about the point gain for the losers.

[quote=@ImportantNobody]
Maybe you only get participation points if you are below a certain point total. Newer people would need the participation points more to catch up and feel motivated while veterans wouldn't feel as big of a need for participation points. This would also allow people to catch the veterans easier, getting up to a certain number before loosing participation points and having to catch up the rest of the way on their own two feet.
[/quote]This method could work.
The only problem is, like Rilla said, that people aren't anywhere that far apart that we can determine a limit. So this would effectively mean that, at least for the time being, we leave the system as it is.
I'm fine with the idea and really I have yet to gain any points but this effectively doesn't solve anything.

[@Impaqt]You may feel that's unfair for people to lose their 25 points but there's perhaps an even larger group who never benefited from it yet. If we make a change to the "rules" then it has to be done consistently. Neither those who made matches before or after the change should benefit in any way.
Taking away points these people got by losing may leave a sour taste in a few people's mouths but remember that points are technically a "reward" and as it goes such things only go to the winner.
That being said I also support ImportantNobody's idea, but of course I leave the decision about the details to more experienced players.