I strongly dislike how people on this site use one word responses in game the comment section
or just go and rate a whole bunch of games without playing them.

You can help by flagging and reporting those comments.

As for spam-rating, I think they mentioned somewhere that if someone has an oddly high amount of rated games in a short time, they'll investigate and decrease it if found guilty of spam-rating.

But that is a hassle, I've suggested several times adding a limit on how many games you can rate per day, somewhere around 30-50. They can still spam-rate with that, but it isn't as severe. I've also suggested rewarding 1 point per rating instead of 2.

I also think creators of games with more "plays" should get more AP than ones with less.

They actually do something like this on Kongregate, but with ratings:
If your game has a rating of at least 2.5 stars on the 50th rating, you receive 50 bonus points ("good game bonus"). If the score is at least 3.0 on the 100th rating, you will receive 75 bonus points ("rad game bonus"). The "totally awesome game bonus" awards 150 bonus points if your game has a score of at least 3.5 stars on the 200th rating, and the "legendary game bonus" awards an unbelievable 300 bonus points if your game has a score of at least 4.0 stars on the 500th rating.

You cannot lose points if the rating for your game falls, and note that these points are ADDED to what you already have. Uploading a game with a rating above 4.0 could therefore earn a total of 575 points. This is, however, pretty rare, as Kongregate users can be pretty picky with their ratings of 4 and 5.
Taken from here.

I've also suggested rewarding 1 point per rating instead of 2.

Last time I checked, the admins won't award any points for ratings in the new AP system.

Anyway, I think the discussion of ratings is somewhat off-topic to this thread since I don't think Reputation will be awarded to ratings. I just wanted to clarify the probable value of ratings.

I've suggested several times adding a limit on how many games you can rate per day

It's 50 per day on Kong, I believe.

Last time I checked, the admins won't award any points for ratings in the new AP system.

I think that's a better idea.
There isn't much point to getting AP for rating a game.
That way people might actually rate the game based on their personal opinion and not whatever number they can click first in order to get AP.

I also think creators of games with more "plays" should get more AP than ones with less.

As Matrix pointed out, Kongregate does use a system similar to this, but personally I don't approve of this system. I'm not entirely sure how the Kong point system works in regards to game developers, but you will notice if you look at the top players there that an unnerving amount of them are game developers. I'm not sure if Kong did it on purpose, but their point system seems to be somewhat in favor of people who submit games.

I've suggested several times adding a limit on how many games you can rate per day, somewhere around 30-50.

Unfortunately, people will still spam-rate, but now it will be spam-rating in favor of longtime users. That's why severely limiting things to unrealistic amounts is generally a mistake: it gives an unfair advantage to the users who have been there the longest.

There's really no reason to give out points for rating a game. If points won't be awarded for posting in the forums, which actually requires effort, it doesn't make sense to give anything just for thoughtlessly clicking on something that doesn't have much of an impact on anybody.

No, I wouldn't like the "more AP per plays"- thing. It would discourage new/bad game developers, and we would get less games here on AG.

It would discourage new/bad game developers

How would it discourage them?
You can already see by game ratings how their game favors in comparison to others.

we would get less games here on AG.

Care to elaborate?

No, I wouldn't like the "more AP per plays"- thing. It would discourage new/bad game developers, and we would get less games here on AG.

The idea proposed was to reward for reaching a certain amount of plays, nobody mentioned anything negative happening to developers that do not get a lot of plays.