Why does FIDE still use Elo? I've been impressed with the way the Glicko rating system works. In particular:


more games played recently cause your rating to stabilize
fewer games played recently cause your rating to fluctuate until you get several recent games under your belt


USCF modified their system to be similar a few years back (where there is a sliding scale to amplify or dampen the rating change for a given match), and now that Glickman (the inventor of Glicko) is on the rating board for the USCF, I imagine they'll eventually adopt an even more flexible system, like his own.

Is there a reason (other than being resistant to change, or that they just haven't gotten around to it yet) that FIDE doesn't adopt a more accurate rating system?
It is not proven that Glicko is more accurate.  Glicko just solves the problem a different way, with a different emphasis.  Consider that all these systems abstract a human mind to a 4 digit number.

There's a lot of politics in ratings; it's a touchy subject.  If FIDE were to adopt it, they'd produce a new top-100 list, and a lot of GMs would likely be upset.

The ELO system is very easy to understand; transparency is important.  More complex systems have immediate disadvantages.