> [{quoted}](name=halo10,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=PlBMQMJN,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-09-15T19:00:30.412+0000) > > How would you know you wouldn't know if the people reformed from being toxic and the game is filled with toxic people anyway... In the past when Riot has unbanned groups of people, 95% of them didn't reform.

> check e-mail. Like Steam does. If you try to log-on from an "unknown" computer, then e-mail confirmation sent. That's 2FA, and I'm 90% sure they have that implemented already. You have to enable it on the website, and I haven't logged in from a new location on the client since I enabled it, so I don't know if it actually works. But it's there. It works for the website atleast.

If you think a call from your job can't be an emergency, then your priorities are wrong. A call from the job could be: "Quick, the store just got robbed!" "Quick, our critical servers are down!" Or any millions of other things, all of which are more important that your game of League. If your job description requires you to be available 24/7 in case of emergencies, then you're going to get fired if you're not there ASAP.

I mean, I agree that punishments could be harder but it literally wouldn't solve your problem in this scenario. No matter how strict of a punishment AFKing results in, that guy isn't going to value your game higher than his job. Real life is full of emergencies, which is why the system is so lenient in regards to AFK. Punishments should be harsher, but people have lives outside of this game. You can't predict literally everything, and it sounds like this guy had something he couldn't plan ahead for. Are you telling me you plan ahead 100% every game? You're never going to face a situation that *requires* you to take care of real life?

It can only be brute-forced if the password is *really* shitty. The idea is that there isn't a lot of value in going through the trouble to 'hack' an account that is only a couple of months old. Not only that, the Ahri games he claims he didn't play, start from the second game he ever played on that account. His account would've been barely a day old. It's *extremely* unlikely that someone would hack such an account.

Not a record at all. I'm pretty sure I've even had game *end* before 14 minutes lol.

> Riot is vague about what can get you punished They kind of have to be. If you start getting exact, people will just tip-toe around the line. You also will find it really hard to even define what toxicity is to begin with. > is it any bit of negativity or do I have to be toxic to other players The system punishes based on consistence and severity. If you're negative every single game, all the time, then it'll add up and eventually get you punished. The first punishment is light (10 game chat restriction). If you continue being negative, Riot will obviously not be as lenient. The first punishment may take a long time to get, but the second one not so much. You're expected to follow the rules, especially after a warning. The more severe you are in your negativity or toxicity, the quicker you'll get punished. People that are *really* severe, will be hit with 14-day bans from the get-go, no chat restrictions. > As if getting an account to a decent level is quick and easy. That kind of depends on your definitions of quick and easy. League has been made much easier to level up in, especially for smurfs. --- I know it sucks, but you have to follow the rules. You don't just get permabanned for the things you said in your chatlogs. You only get that from being a repeat offender. You've been told at least once to cut it out, probably more than that. At the 14-day ban, it said you were on your last chance. The next punishment would be a permaban, and you didn't heed the warning.

I would rather face a team of 5 scripters, than play with a single inter. No matter what, inting is the one most devastating thing for a game. A 14-day ban is MORE than adequate, and you don't get to have special treatment just because it's the first time you did it. The first time punishment for inting IS 14 days, exactly because of how severe it is. And people downvoted you because it's so obvious that you deserve the 14-day ban. Why do you need us to tell you why you deserve it, when the client does the same thing?

I don't think you can even get banned for abusing bugs on PBE, infact it's probably even encouraged so that Riot has more data to try and identify the issue. Just laugh at whoever accuses people of that lol

Yup, you actively encouraged others to commit suicide. Riot heavily cracks down on that, and the automated system definently catches it most of the time. The likelyhood of that guy being a Rioter is extremely low, but even if we ignore that game, the other also would be enough to warrant this punishment. After Game 2 and 3, you'd have been *right* on the edge of getting a 14 day ban. Game 1 was just the last push to actually trigger the automated system.

It's a really plausible coincidence lol You were toxic, which gets people banned. The automated system reacts quickly to ban people after games. It's really not unlikely at all. And even if he *is* a Riot employee, there's no rules against banning toxic players you've encountered personally. It is of course not allowed for Riot employees to be toxic. If they are discovered to have been so, their jobs are at stake. But unless the player in question had 'Riot' in their name, then it's probably not a Rioter. Also, post your chatlogs. Just your chatlogs, full, unedited. (I have to clarify, because most people try to inject their whole life story between lines, to justify them)

You shouldn't believe that they actually work at Riot, that's a super common lie to come up with while being toxic. It's MUCH more likely that you actually just got banned by the system for being toxic.

> [{quoted}](name=boricCentaur1,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=J9Td4dap,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-06-24T15:31:00.338+0000) > > lol bot adc and supports,mid assassins and mages,jg assassins,tanks and bruisers and top tanks,bruisers it's has been like that for the majority of the games life. > > If you actually believe what you said then you're not playing league ALSO the whole pro thing has nothing to do with this and I give a reason in my post. > > Also I am getting downvoted my people when no actually argument like you, your just flat out wrong about what meta is. Like people like you need to actually think before acting like there right. Bot ADC and supports? What does those rules represent? Can you only play marksmen, as ADC? Only play tank or utility as support? Pyke is an assassin. He is a support. Where does he belong? Should Riot keep creating special edge cases for every champ that belongs in one class, but can actually go another? Because you mention Vayne top as an acceptable role, she's neither a bruiser nor a tank. > If you actually believe what you said then you're not playing league ALSO the whole pro thing has nothing to do with this and I give a reason in my post. What an easy way to get out of actually arguing. This is what I mean with the fact that people don't want to debate you. If you had any good arguments, that hasn't already been refuted, you wouldn't go for the strategy of making stuff up about me, then using it as a reason why my argument means less. That's called a strawman. I play league quite a lot. Not on this account anymore, but on others. But even if I did, so what? My arguments doesn't depend on me playing League. I could have never played a single game, and my arguments would stand as strong as ever. I merely said that the reason League has thrived for 10 years, is because of it's ever evolving nature. An objective statement, that doesn't rely on my experience with the game. Because ALL games that has been around for so long, with even remotely the same popularity, undergoes major meta changes. Hearthstone, Overwatch, Dota, StarCraft, and many, many more has all only thrived for as long as they did because they never went stale. THAT'S a fact.

That sure is an unpopular opinion.. But there's a reason it's unpopular. Defined meta create stale games, and stale games die out. The main reason League of Legends has stayed at the top is because of it's constantly evolving nature. It'd die out super quickly if Riot actually enforced the meta. And just look at pro play. People are playing champions in offmeta positions more than ever before, and it's more exciting that ever before. > I can wait to get downvoted by people who have no argument but downvote anyways since they don't like facts. Your ideas don't get downvoted because people 'don't life facts'. They get downvoted because they're bad ideas, and your argumentation for them really isn't on point either. People don't see a reason to debate you when your arguments boil down to *your* idea of how the game should be, presented as facts. Your 'facts' rely too much on your opinion to actually be considered facts.

There's no requirement to type in chat. Communication using pings only, is 100% acceptable. You can't get punished for not writing in chat.

The IFS popups informing you of a punishment you've received never states that you broke the summoners code. Not once. Infact I don't think Riot has ever used the summoners code to punish someone, because they can just use the actual rules they have in the ToU, which Nubrac arguably also broke.

The summoners code isn't a rulebook. It's a guide on how to be a friendly player, but it is not an enforcable set of rules. Otherwise people would be obligated to build friendships with other summoners, or be obligated to help players get better at the game. Neither of these things are enforced rules, but is a social codes. Ways to enhance the experience for you and others around you. Which is why it's called the summoners code and not the summoners rules. --- I agree that Nubrac deserves a punishment, but you can't make breaking the summoners code the reason for it.

Wuks is not a Riot employee. He is a volunteer for the boards. He has a lot of insight into the system, but no more than any other non-riot employee could obtain. He can be wrong.

> Any help would be appreciated, please refrain from saying "If they say you script, you script", and watch some of my games before. Well, it's tough to help you. No one here is going to sit through all your games and analyze to guess whether or not you scripted. Not to mention we can only see games from the latest patch anyways.. And even if we *could* see all your games, our word means nothing. No one at Riot is going to go through all your games, and they have no reason to believe what any of us say. It's a sad truth, but there really isn't anything we can do for you. I understand it's sad and sympathize with you if you truly didn't script, but even then there's nothing I can do.

> MYTH #1 : Riot doesn't participate > The data from the Red Tracker shows 1,848 posts or comments from Rioters (read: people with red names) in the last 6 months. > On average, that works out to 30 posts per day. I'd say your post still stands, but that's *10* posts per day, not 30. 30 days in a month, 6 months: 6 * 30 = 180 1848 / 180 = ~10 posts per day If they made 30 posts per day, it would be 30 * 180 = 5400 posts in the last six months

> I feel like you don't understand what qualifies has "personal information". In fact, the only "personal information" Riot has about you is your email. They may also have your credit card information, and other linked accounts. If that's the case, you can ask for that to be deleted. > In any case, they don't have any other tangible information about who you are, so the GDPR isn't an issue. The reason I assumed so is because when you ask them for your information, you also get information on reports you've received. I wouldn't classify this as personal information, but it seems Riot did. So by the same logic I assumed that information regarding bans would also be counted as personal information. Also, under GDPR what is considered personal data depends on context. For example your name alone wouldn't be considered personal data, as there are probably many people with your name, and as such no one could identify you, from your name alone. Same goes for work occupation, or general location. But if you have someones name, work occupation and general location you can absolutely identify them. Which is why it's not cut and dry whether or not information about bans is considered personal information. You can't identify someone solely by the specific reason they were banned (assuming the data has been anonymized), but given other data in combination with ban information, that might not always be the case. You're probably right, it isn't considered personal information, but it it's the definition of personal information may be broader that you'd think.

> An automatic system is not going to suddenly judge someone as guilty when it builds up enough *maybes*. It would be stupid to program it that way since no matter how many inconclusive games you pile up it's not proof that someone intentionally fed. Inconclusive means inconclusive. > They either are intentionally feeding or they aren't. I have to disagree. I obviously don't have insider knowledge on the system, but the concept of a decision over many 'maybes' isn't really that stupid. Sure, someone is either intentionally feeding or not, but the system doesn't really know the difference. When the system makes a jugdement, it'll always have a certain amount of confidence. If it thinks someone is inting, but only with a 50% confidence, obviously it shouldn't punish someone. But if it has like 90% confidence for 5 games, then you can be pretty sure they were inting. Obviously, even if you find only a 50% confidence over a lot of games, that still doesn't mean someone should get punished. It's all about finding the right numbers, the right implementation.

While on the surface the system may *seem* unfair, it isn't IMO. The system isn't *too* predictable though. It factors in a lot things like previous instances of toxicity, severity, etc.. when making a decision. We might not even know all the variables it considers. So you can't expect the same outcome for two different players over a single game, or a single instance of toxicity. However, Riot cracks down heavily on stuff like hatespeech and encouragement to suicide. It's not *entirely* known how the system deals with it, but we know it's harsh. IAreTheBestest is also completely wrong. You can't gang up on a player with multiple reports, he is just trolling.

I agree with you, to an extent I've visited here regularly for about 2½ years. I started out SUPER toxic, I couldn't sympathize with anyone. But now I'm actively trying my hardest to not do that anymore. I try to empathize and explain rationally how the system works. But a lot of other people seemingly don't do that. Over the years, very few regulars have stuck out to me as not being rude, and a few of them even began transitioning to being toxic. I guess the simplest explanation is that the regulars get into discussions that turn sour. When a new thread appears, they can't separate their previous heated discussions from new ones. Their default *becomes* toxic over time. On PB we've made kind of a culture. It's no longer really about helping those who come with questions, but about garnering upvotes and respect from your PB friends. The culture is ingrained deeply. I even feel some of the mods have this. They post snarky comments that are unhelpful and in some cases will turn away people from asking questions in the future.. HOWEVER, I don't think we should remove PB. I don't like how loosely moderated the forum is. I understand that they're volunteers and human, and make mistakes. But I feel like they don't even try to be examples of how a good regular should be. But this doesn't mean PB is useless. Sometimes good things come from PB. Players have interesting discussions, or someone gets a proper explanation which they're thankful for. Even through the years and the toxic times of me being here, the most memorable moments have always been when I've helped someone and they thanked me. Likewise, I really have taken note of when someone actually managed to make me see the picture through their eyes. The few good moments *heavily* outweigh the bad. Of course, that's just my opinion and all. These good moments come more often when no one is super upset, which is why I'm now no actively trying to be positive. I'm sorry if this was hard to read, I just wanted to write my thoughts. I didn't really organize them that well.

lol how are you going to stop smurfs without taking away a major reason League is a big as it is. And so what they make Riots numbers look better when they don't publicly reveal their numbers?

As for with most reworked champions, there was a couple of issues they wanted to fix. Keep in mind, this is in general. Not all these points will apply to all people: * Boring to play * Boring to play against * Too hard to balance, either extremely strong or extremely weak * Outdated kit

> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=0000000000000001000100010000,timestamp=2019-05-08T20:00:50.908+0000) > > Those lawsuits are generally thrown out as frivolous if a person did not prove a criminal act via a police investigation. Sometimes they can succeed without, but very rarely. > > But anyways, they could've gone to arbitration and gotten that monetary award, but they're refusing to do so. Why? Do they know they'll fail because it's a frivolous claim? Because it's not just about the money. If a huge company loses a lawsuit it sends a waaay louder message, and peaks the publics interest more. It's pressuring Riot to actually change to avoid future lost lawsuits.

> [{quoted}](name=Ornndyr2k19,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=00000000000000010000,timestamp=2019-05-08T17:37:56.721+0000) > > yeah i don't > > i had a presentation a while ago about presenting ideas > > the presenter told us about a fuck ton of subconscious actions that affect greatly whether the idea is accepted or not > from hand shaking to movement in space to eye contact > > not one not a single one of the ideas he spoke about was ever related to the sex of the speaker > > so that female presenter most likely was inept at explaining her idea while the male presenter was > > IE the male presenter did a better job *SHOCKER* I don't just want to just accuse you of being sexist, but you're not infering that the male presenter *naturally* did a better job, because he is a man? > Promotions are always first come first serve in every company and you being female has nothing to do of you getting suddenly replaced by someone else in fact the very notion that specifically female workers were wanted for a position IS SEXISM I agree. You shouldn't pick someone based on their gender, but based on their qualifications. Don't get me wrong. I'm not here to argue that women should have *more* power, or get prefferential treatment. I'm here because Riot has actively given males prefferential treatment, seemingly only because they are male. > Dick pics is a crime? since when? anyone with a sense of progression in this world will even fucking take advantage of an unwanted dick pic from a man this is why they didn't promote them ;) I cannot fathom in what society sending unsolicited dickpics does not constitute sexual assault or atleast sexual harassment. Someone going out in public and showing their dicks to people are arrested for sexual indecency. If they do it *specifically* with someone in mind, they're arrested for sexual assault. And I don't live in the US. It's not an US definition. In fact, ALL my neighboring countries view this as sexual assault. You actually have to go REALLY far away from me before it's no longer considered sexual assault. And I *don't* live in the US.

> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=00000000000000010001,timestamp=2019-05-08T18:42:27.268+0000) > > No, it's not. Lawsuits are for **civil issues**. Criminal charges are for **criminal issues such as sexual harassment**. Why have police reports or criminal charges not been filed? Ehhh, not really. https://ottingerlaw.com/california/sexual-harassment-guide/ > # What Remedies are Available to Victims of California Sexual Harassment? > Victims of sexual harassment may have a right to recover monetary damages to compensate them for their losses. > If you prevail in your claims you may be entitled to the following remedies: >* Damages for emotional distress * Hiring or reinstatement * Back pay or promotion * Changes in policies or practices of the employer > * **If you file a civil lawsuit and prevail**, the court may also award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, including expert witness fees. So they absolutely can file a valid lawsuit against Riot for sexual assault and/or discrimination.

> [{quoted}](name=Ornndyr2k19,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8KAOwPRU,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-08T11:53:23.916+0000) > > yes because americans are calling sexual harassment on touching shoulders and getting looked at > > they are trying to stop dumb lawsuits not genuine ones > > and i honestly doubt someone would be r%%%%%ed enough to sexually harass someone at RIOT DURING WORKING HOURS You have no idea what is even going on... We aren't talking about touching shoulders, or weird looks. We are talking systematic sexism and sexual harrassment. From the report: > One day, Lacy conducted an experiment: After an idea she really believed in fell flat during a meeting, she asked a male colleague to present the same idea to the same group of people days later. He was skeptical, but she insisted that he give it a shot. “Lo and behold, the week after that, [he] went in, presented exactly as I did and the whole room was like, ‘Oh my gosh, this is amazing.’ [His] face turned beet red and he had tears in his eyes,” said Lacy. “They just didn’t respect women.” --- > Among the people we spoke to, three women described being groomed for promotions, and doing jobs above their title and pay grade, until men were suddenly brought in to replace them. Both male and female sources have described seeing unsolicited and unwelcome pictures of male genitalia from bosses or colleagues. That is *per definition* sexism and sexual harrasment. This *should* be taken up in a lawsuit, and it's an absolutely valid lawsuit. > and i honestly doubt someone would be r%%%%%ed enough to sexually harass someone at RIOT DURING WORKING HOURS You are so willfully ignorant it hurts. You argument for why sexual harrassment is improbable is because no one is dumb enough to do it? Sexual harrasment can happen everywhere, to anyone. People ARE stupid enough to do it. ESPECIALLY people in power, because they know they can get away with it. A woman complains of sexual harrasment? Just threathen to fire her, or lock her out of the tools she has to deal with it through arbitration. Sorry, but the word of one guy, who doesn't work at Riot, who doesn't know what goes on at Riot, who doesn't even have time to research what he is arguing for, saying it's *improbable* doesn't mean shit compared to the 150 Riot employees who KNOWS what happens at Riot, and risks their jobs to prove it and demonstrate against it.

Wait for the ticket. It's literally the only thing he can do. No one here can help him. If Riot investigates and finds it was him, then there's nothing your friend can do. They may even also find that it wasn't him, but also are unable to prove that he was hacked. He could've given out his password or something, and Riot wouldn't have any way of knowing. In this case, your friend still can't do anything. It's all in the hands of Riot.

My main problem with Blue Essence is just that it doesn't feel anywhere near as rewarding. I play normals a lot, and if you've already gotten that first win of the day you barely get any reward for winning. Atleast that's how it feels.

It's not really that common. It's very unlikely that Riot themselves was breached. And even if they were, only people who are really unlucky and have very bad passwords would be in trouble. You see, when a password is stored on their database, it's getting encrypted via complex mathematical algorithms. These mathematical algorithms are *really* hard to reverse (essentially impossible) and no one but a few Riot employees should even know what algorithms were used. This is simplified, there are other things your password goes through to get protected, but the idea is that even if someone could see the value stored in the database that represents your password, they wouldn't know what it was. However not all websites are so good with security. Some websites just store your password in the database. If you ever click 'forgot password' on a website, and it sends you a mail with it, then you know that they just stored your password plainly. And you should NEVER use that website again. They'd be massively incompetent anyways. So if you used your League password somewhere else, and that somewhere else happened to be insecure and store in plainly, or just encrypted it with shitty algorithms, then a hacker would be able to access your League account. And anywhere else that uses that password. If you also use that password on your E-mail, then a hacker would have access to virtually ALL your accounts, anywhere on the internet. Another possibility is that you were infected with a keylogger. A keylogger would send everything you type to a hacker, who could then use that to log in to your accounts. You should run an anti-virus scan, just to be safe. I recommend MalwareBytes. But in terms of just your League account, there's nothing anyone can really access with it specifically.

> If I want to defend myself from some prick on the internet I will defend myself. If you have a problem with this you can go fuck yourself. That's very cool, but it has literally 0 effect on us. We quite literally could not care less about that statement. In the end, you're the one that gets punished, not us.

It's absolutely possible, people do it all the time. I know you don't want the 'don't be toxic' comments, but that's literally the only advice we can give you. You cannot reform and be toxic at the same time. You don't have to be positive either though. Just don't write anything. Mute everyone at the start of the game (they'll still be able to see if you write something, mind you). If you *really* feel like saying something, keep it to 'GG', 'GJ', etc..

Because when you int, you ruin the game for 9 other players. You can also mute 'bullies'.

It takes multiple punishments to get permabanned for toxicity. You have *plenty* time and chances to realize that you shouldn't argue or be toxic for any reason. So in my mind, a permaban isn't a harsh punishment. But no, there isn't any way to get it back or transfer the items. It wouldn't really be that much of a punishment then, would it?

Riot bans someone for flaming an inter: 'OMG Riot only cares about words' Riot bans someone for inting a flamer: 'OMG Riot doesn't care at all about words' --- You just can't win. You deserve to get punished for flaming. But you deserve to get punished more for inting.

That's because it's the wrong password or username. That account hasn't necessarily been banned, you just can't login to it lol.

> Many people have never touched the mute function and instead have always tried to argue with them. Please. Try it out. It wont work 100% but it will make your game surprisingly calm and much easier to handle, sometimes even have you win the game. You'll be amazed at how often peope will calm down if you do not say anything. They'll feel embarrassed that they are the only one typing in chat, screaming into the void while their other 4 teammates don't even turn around to speak to them. This is the best treatment we can give assholes. Complete silence. Remember. These pieces of shit are not worth your time. Let them know that and leave them alone in their sad lives. Keep in mind, that if you mute someone they can still see what you write.

Yeah, League had a similar system and it failed horribly. It was a lot worse than the current system. It was slower, and had a larger rate of incorrectly given punishments. CS:GOs playerbase consists of more engaged players, while League is a heavily casual game.

> prevently language filter. a way to not letting a player to send a text with toxic and offensive words. Simply not possible. People will ALWAYS find a way to get around a filter. Always. > permanently chat ban. When they had really long chat bans in the past, people started inting. Inting is more severe and harder to catch, so that's not really a great option.

Problem is, you CAN'T track people around. It would either include some serious privacy issues or you'd hurting innocent players. All because of a TINY minority of players.

I don't want to just be negative, but I don't feel like it would really make that much of an impact. I don't think there are that many players that dodge knowing they can just play on another account. Most dodges probably happens in cases where people are ready to just spend the time for the punishment, or actually is an emergency. It's also a very minor problem, but there exists people who play on the same PC, in private environments (not something where you can just apply to a IP based program). Suddenly those players get punished for something they didn't do.

Well if you've sent in a ticket and Riot already said you couldn't get the account back, then I'm afraid that just how it is. The moderators on here don't work for Riot, and can't tell you if you can get it back. I fully 100% agree that Riot should have an optional 2FA, it's actually quite shocking that they don't have it yet. The only way you could've been hacked is either through another website where you used the same password, or if you've got a virus. It could also be if you have a really simple password, of course.

The cats and dogs have taken over man. I heard they actually infested Riots servers, so now the only thing anyone can say is dog and cat related stuff!! Curse those damned pets!

I agree, there's a point where friendliness goes from nice to just annoying, but I'd honestly MUCH rather have someone unintentionally tilt the team with their 'niceness' (and it really takes an extremely overwhelming amount of nice-ness to actually tilt the team), than someone intentionally tilting the team with toxicity. However I intepret OP's main question as why the community would rather prefer friendliness over flaming those inting and playing poorly.

> Why is the communitys priority seemingly to be NICE and friendly in chat, but you can throw or feed or int however much you want? Being nice and friendly leads to higher quality experiences for most players. And throwing and feeding already feels really bad without some asshat constantly reminding you of it. By choosing to flame those players you are literally just making everyone feel worse, and tilting them and lowering your chances of a comeback. And once you've chosen a target, you'll be less receptive to your own mistakes, becoming more careless and again: lowering the chances of a comeback. For inting players I can atleast *understand* why you choose to flame them, I'll always be of the opinion that you shouldn't flame in *any* case, but I can understand why you'd flame someone who's inting. --- The short answer is that most players prefer a nice environment over one where you punish player for playing poorly. This is a game afterall.

So you got punished for roaming, or just reported? Because you can report for literally anything, but that doesn't mean it's punishable.