: Another case of the automated system being way over strict.
Just FYI, I found your sympathy very comforting. So I don't agree with all the downvotes you got. Take my upvote, friend :-)
: > @Umbral Regent I understand you know the rules well and I appreciate that. However I already wanted to point out that the decision might be "technically" correct, but morally worthy of reconsideration. Does that sound like it makes sense? It does, and I thank you for clarifying. Though it doesn't really bear repeating, my stance is pretty obvious when it comes to morals and the punishment system; largely, I feel that the system works best when the two are separate, and I keep my responses generally within the ballpark of that being the case; where the rules are broken, don't expect high probability of appeal, etc. etc.; That said, I have seen cases where one-off instances of poor behavior have been appealed with a stern warning, on account of the player understanding their punishment and making the earnest promise to not repeat it. Those cases are very few and very far between, so I'd still reckon the odds are pretty low, but, given your disposition to the feedback, I feel it's worth mentioning. Just know that those samesuch appeals are wholly within the jurisdiction of the Support Agents who handle your request, and it's almost certain that a vast majority would elect to maintain principle and not overturn correctly-applied punishments. Best of luck on your Support Ticket, and if you have any questions about the punishment system or your punishment, don't hesitate to ask.
Thank you very much for your input :-) I appreciate your honest opinion. Well I guess I will try to mention bettering myself to the support - maybe it helps. If not, I will live with the decision. In any case: lesson learned.
: > [{quoted}](name=valh0e,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=MRJyAtmN,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-13T23:09:31.357+0000) > > The enemy agreed. Then who reported you?
I guess the troll :)
: > Yea you clearly misread the situation... What's there to misread? The OP plainly states that their team (including them) chose to open lanes... > 3) We decided as a team (except for the afk ofcourse) that we would like to forfeit this game and all acted accordingly, leaving our lanes open. Which is against the rules. And unless I'm missing something, they also admitted to intentionally feeding as a way to "have fun" in a match that they chose to give up in. > 4) I did try to make the most fun of the situation, considering that I would loose my LP anyway. Yes, I did get killed a lot while making fun. > > I got banned for two weeks for the reason of "intentional feeding" however whereas this might be technically correct, it was decided by the whole team that we would forfeit. And considering that they're trying to use the team opening lanes as an excuse, I'm doubtful that they meant something else when they said that they were "trying to make the most fun" and that the punishment being for intentional feeding was "technically correct". But, if I _did_ misread something, then the OP is free to clarify. > ...further more it’s also forcing them to go on with an unpleasant game in the process... You're going to have unpleasant games every now and again. Are we supposed to just exempt a player from the rules and let them throw up their hands and say "I quit" if they find the match unpleasant? I can only wonder how many matches would devolve into people quitting at the first sign of things going poorly. Bad matchup? Unpleasant, I quit. Enemy team scored first blood? Unpleasant, I quit. Enemy team consistently ganks? Unpleasant, I quit. First turret blood? I quit. When you queue up for a match of League, you are explicitly agreeing to play that match out until either Nexus explodes. You don't get to quit just because a match is unpleasant. If you can't handle unpleasant matches, don't queue up for a game where you can have them. It's as simple as that. > ...this man should not be punished... That's not for you to decide; it's for Riot. Opening lanes and intentionally feeding are both against the rules. > ...and it is far from justified since agreed upon by the whole team... But did the enemy team agree? If not, then it is justified. And clearly, someone must not have agreed, elsewise a report wouldn't have been filed. Just because 4-5 players agree to break the rules doesn't change the fact that the rules were broken. They don't get any special privileges or exemption from the rules just because they agreed to break them. The players don't decide the rules, Riot does, and the players can't just decide that they don't want to follow whatever specific rule that's inconvenient to them.
The enemy agreed.
valh0e (EUW)
: Got banned for "Inting"
Let me start by saying I thank you all for your comments. I did not know I'd receive so much feedback in such a short amount of time. What I get from the discussion is that this topic is clearly regulated in the rules, however my case is very controversial. There might not be a right or wrong here but I haver submitted a ticket asking for reconsideration. @Umbral Regent I understand you know the rules well and I appreciate that. However I already wanted to point out that the decision might be "technically" correct, but morally worthy of reconsideration. Does that sound like it makes sense?
Rioter Comments


Level 125 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion