SCP 106 (NA)
: So my post on fiora mains gets taken down, but not all the yasuo main threads
Your removals should tell you why the post was removed. If you feel like someone else's post is breaking a rule then you're free to report it. >dislike bot/yasuo haters already downvoting :) Two people downvoted your thread so far. I contributed one because it just seems like a whine-fest. You're not giving any information about the removal other than you don't like it and feel other threads should be removed while accusing the mods of being hypocrites.
: > [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kUAgAYHP,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-08T02:24:32.654+0000) > > Where is your source for that percent? Do you even have a realistic argument? Since wayyy too many players are posting in those boards about the non banned trollers do you seriously think that the percentage of banning trollers is a big one?
> [{quoted}](name=ThyDelutionist,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kUAgAYHP,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-08T02:50:51.339+0000) > > Do you even have a realistic argument? Since wayyy too many players are posting in those boards about the non banned trollers do you seriously think that the percentage of banning trollers is a big one? Realistically, I believe the number of people banned for griefing is greater than 0% since I can directly go to threads where some have been banned. That alone would disprove your original claim that "Trollers aren't getting banned". At the same time, since I'm being realistic, I'm not going to claim I know what percentage are banned because I don't have access to that information. Neither would Riot (since they would need to know which ones they missed) and especially neither would you.
: > [{quoted}](name=DuskDaUmbreon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kUAgAYHP,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-12-08T01:49:09.844+0000) > > Source on the exact opposite of reality happening? Meaning what? That 1% of trolls are banned.... So what?
> [{quoted}](name=ThyDelutionist,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kUAgAYHP,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-08T01:56:31.595+0000) > > Meaning what? That 1% of trolls are banned.... So what? Where is your source for that percent?
: Personal research about inting people
Sounds like Riot was right to throw a punishment on you if you're the type of person to troll games.
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=DrDisrespect,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=iZadLspu,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2019-12-07T07:10:16.003+0000) > > "They do." > > Rarely. Getting 2-week or permabanned is a much more common than just getting a restriction. Considering a 2-week ban is the first punishment only if there was a punishment escalation (via zero tolerance stuff) or the punishment was for gameplay related behavior, I highly doubt that. It's just easier to brush off a chat-restriction since it doesn't prevent you from playing the game. Less likely that someone will complain about a chat restriction compared to a punishment that locks you out of the account. > ----------- > "Makes them a liability to their team" > > If that was true they wouldn't have added the ability to turn off team chat in the settings - so that argument is objectively flawed. Turning off team chat is something the player does of their own accord. It is also something that they can turn off at will. So a person with extremely poor self-control can go right back into the options and turn team-chat back on if they're determined to insult another player. If the same player with such low self control instead couldn't turn chat back on? Well, they already showed poor self control so it's likely they'll just find another way to exhibit their anger at the other player. Like through trolling. > ----------- > "Yeah, no. That actually helps hackers. Look up the logic behind banwaves." > > That doesn't apply to this. I'm talking about IP banning hackers/scripters - not change the way they protect the games infrastructure. IP bans (for any reason) are flawed and unused nowadays because of the real potential of collateral damage. For example, a college dorm likely has a single public IP address for all of the residents going through the router/switch. That one IP address is what Riot sees so banning it would ban everyone in that dorm. > ----------- > "Turns out they get banned for it, if it can actually be detected. It is really hard for a computer to tell the difference between inting and a bad player having a bad game." > > That's why you don't just leave it to robots... you go off of reports and the accounts record. If someone gets 20 intentional feeding reports in 5 games, you could then send it to someone to review the footage and determine if it's actually inting. You're underestimating the number of games that are played per day and overestimating how many people are intentionally feeding multiple games in a row. Almost all intentional feeders I've seen do so sporadically, not as a constant habit.
: hard to explain riots flaws to a bunch of fanboys. basically the system is extremely flawed if you're flagged for report then if you are honorable and someone else isn't and you both report each other then you are the one whos punished. Basically riot punishes you based on the amount of reports it doesn't matter if they are unjust. And honestly they don't care. As billion dollar company they don't care about they small or the minority. I'm sure you'll downvote but at least I'm honest with reality. The system is fine for majority that doesn't make it good for everyone.
> [{quoted}](name=Rakan ør Feed,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=iZadLspu,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-12-07T06:45:38.598+0000) > > hard to explain riots flaws to a bunch of fanboys. basically the system is extremely flawed if you're flagged for report then if you are honorable and someone else isn't and you both report each other then you are the one whos punished. Basically riot punishes you based on the amount of reports it doesn't matter if they are unjust. This is false. The quantity of reports do not matter beyond the first in any given game and a reported game will not result in any penalty what-so-ever if no poor behavior is found. See here; *["It only takes one report for our systems to review a game. Additional reports will not do anything for the offending player"](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/201752884-Reporting-a-Player)* >And honestly they don't care. As billion dollar company they don't care about they small or the minority. It's in a billion dollar company's best interest to make sure that they don't assign bans when no fault is found. >I'm sure you'll downvote but at least I'm honest with reality. The system is fine for majority that doesn't make it good for everyone. Claiming that you're honest with reality doesn't make your statements true. It's just a claim.
: got kicked out of a game where it said "your session has ended" before i could report a toxic player
: > [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=BBYniPdH,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-12-06T07:24:42.243+0000) > > It's dismissing their opinion and argument by throwing them into the category of "Riot apologist". Similar to calling someone a "Riot fanboy" to dismiss an argument. It's not the same thing because the definition of an apologist is not offensive. Nor is Riot fanboy. My post was deemed offensive. > The question implies that they are unqualified to have the title. Still, this is not offensive. I might call the president unqualified to serve the country that is not deemed offensive and that's why in democratic countries you don't get punished for this. > Then why did you include it in your post? Or were you just trying to throw more mud on their name? It has nothing to do with my post getting removed. It has everything to do though with the so called specialists opinion on the subject. Building unconventionally is not bannable by RIOT. Riot mentioned this so many times.
> [{quoted}](name=SirTauntsALot,realm=EUW,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=BBYniPdH,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-06T07:33:33.209+0000) > > It's not the same thing because the definition of an apologist is not offensive. Nor is Riot fanboy. My post was deemed offensive. I said it was rude. In the PB section of the boards the rules pertaining to civility are much more strict than the other sections. You were generalizing them with a label so as to dismiss their opinion. > Still, this is not offensive. I might call the president unqualified to serve the country that is not deemed offensive and that's why in democratic countries you don't get punished for this. This is Riot games. Not a country. There are behavioral rules to follow. > It has nothing to do with my post getting removed. It has everything to do though with the so called specialists opinion on the subject. Building unconventionally is not bannable by RIOT. Riot mentioned this so many times. Again, you're making a strawman out of their argument. I feel like you're ignoring the point that I brought up that their argument was not entirely composed of the mobi-boots purchase. Similar to how you ignored their other points. Since it has nothing to do with the removal you're trying to continue the argument just so you can fling mud on them.
: > [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=BBYniPdH,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-12-06T07:07:00.467+0000) > > This is rude. Explain to me how you think it is rude? Is it because I used the word apologist? If i perhaps wrote " Why are you using an argument to defend something controversial" would that not make it rude? Let me know I'm curious. > This is also rude. Their role as a specialist has no influence on their opinion whether or not someone was intentionally feeding. Okay. So asking them if they call themselves a specialist is rude? How so? > They mentioned mobi boots as part of the reason, but not the whole reason why they believed the intentional feeding ban was accurate. To accuse their opinion of being completely based on the mobi boots purchase is strawmanning their argument. > > They even specifically stated that buying mobi boots alone does not mean that someone was intentionally feeding. This has nothing to do with why my post was removed.
> [{quoted}](name=SirTauntsALot,realm=EUW,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=BBYniPdH,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-12-06T07:11:33.273+0000) > > Explain to me how you think it is rude? Is it because I used the word apologist? If i perhaps wrote " Why are you using an argument to defend something controversial" would that not make it rude? Let me know I'm curious. It's dismissing their opinion and argument by throwing them into the category of "Riot apologist". Similar to calling someone a "Riot fanboy" to dismiss an argument. > Okay. So asking them if they call themselves a specialist is rude? How so? The question implies that they are unqualified to have the title. > This has nothing to do with why my post was removed. Then why did you include it in your post? Or were you just trying to throw more mud on their name?
: NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOUR AFK PUNISHMENTS GET RID OF THEM OR MAKE REAL ONES
If Riot were to give loss forgiven to one side, they would need to diminish the LP gained for the winning side to avoid stacking imbalances in LP gain/loss. And that wouldn't feel nice for the winning team to be only offered a pittance because someone on the other team left when they were getting steamrolled. Greatly increasing the punishment for leaving is not going to increase the quality of your games that would have had a leave. If a person disconnected unintentionally, they'd still have disconnected no matter how harsh you make the penalty. If a person disconnects intentionally, knowing that disconnecting holds an extremely harsh penalty for leaving, they'd just stick around and intentionally play like shit to end the game faster. If they were willing to get a guaranteed loss by leaving they wouldn't be that adverse to playing poorly intentionally to end the game early with a loss. As long as they made it remotely look like they were playing like shit unintentionally they would avoid even manual reviews.
: My post was deemed uncivil and offensive (explain why)
> I don't know what RIot apologist you are but this is wrong on so many levels. This is rude. >You call yourself a specialist? This is also rude. Their role as a specialist has no influence on their opinion whether or not someone was intentionally feeding. >He also claimed that buying mobis is a reason to get reported. They mentioned mobi boots as part of the reason, but not the whole reason why they believed the intentional feeding ban was accurate. To accuse their opinion of being completely based on the mobi boots purchase is strawmaning their argument. They even specifically stated that buying mobi boots alone does not mean that someone was intentionally feeding. > [Buying mobis does not automatically mean someone is intentionally feeding](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/pcInTYKw-mistakenly-banned?comment=0009)
: > [{quoted}](name=KFCeytron,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4NveyOEn,comment-id=0003000000000001,timestamp=2019-12-06T06:10:54.870+0000) > > What you said was: > > You used phrases like: > > "never" > "for any reason" > > The content you quoted, however, uses phrases like: > > "almost never" > "usually" > "generally" > > These two groups of phrases have different meanings. Effectively, your claim is false. > > The key is this: > > If Riot doesn't think they made a mistake, they don't lift a ban. And usually they don't think they made a mistake. But sometimes, they see that they have made a mistake, and in those cases, they may - and occasionally do - lift a ban. even if it's incorrectly placed they won't appeal it. they just go "tough shit. we not appealing it" don't you think with all the permaban stories that show up on the boards there would also be stories of those getting bans appealed? the reason there aren't any appeal stories is because riot never appeals them.
> [{quoted}](name=Inkling Commando,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4NveyOEn,comment-id=00030000000000010000,timestamp=2019-12-06T06:16:37.013+0000) > > even if it's incorrectly placed they won't appeal it. they just go "tough shit. we not appealing it" don't you think with all the permaban stories that show up on the boards there would also be stories of those getting bans appealed? the reason there aren't any appeal stories is because riot never appeals them. [Oh, I have another example for you I guess.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/foNLWIZA-dont-be-like-me) The user had a perma-ban that was reduced to a 14-day.
: > [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4NveyOEn,comment-id=0003000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-06T05:57:35.539+0000) > > There's a very important functional word in there, "almost". You seem to be ignoring the direct evidence in my link where I tallied quite a few people that had their ban reversed when the reason for their ban was cheating while the account was compromised. > > So clearly there are reasons that Riot will reverse bans. "**I wasn't playing during that game! Can't you do something about this**? Remember that you are fully responsible for all activity made on your account, and if suspensions or bans are incurred, we will not be able to modify them." actually read the support page I showed you instead of providing false evidence about permabans being appealed. they're permanent for a reason. if appealing a permaban was as easy as scrounging up false info and such to make it look real and add in a sob story then every permaban would be appealed. but guess what? they aren't.
> [{quoted}](name=Inkling Commando,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4NveyOEn,comment-id=00030000000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-06T06:13:22.433+0000) > > "**I wasn't playing during that game! Can't you do something about this**? > Remember that you are fully responsible for all activity made on your account, and if suspensions or bans are incurred, we will not be able to modify them." > > actually read the support page I showed you instead of providing false evidence about permabans being appealed. they're permanent for a reason. if appealing a permaban was as easy as scrounging up false info and such to make it look real and add in a sob story then every permaban would be appealed. but guess what? they aren't. "False evidence"? Are you claiming that those people were not banned? Or are you claiming that their ban was not removed? Because it has to be either of those since the evidence is based on other users and their match history rather my own opinion. Claiming that their ban was not removed is silly, because many of those cases I checked and they started playing again after they had their issue. You're free to check as well (once Riot fixes their match history API, but you could probably check via in-game client). Claiming that all of those individuals never got a ban (despite them coming to the boards about it) is a pretty damn insane conspiracy theory that doesn't remotely approach being a valid argument.
: > [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4NveyOEn,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-12-06T04:45:20.601+0000) > > [Never?](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/uVnmlJde-3rd-party-program-bans) https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/360025054013-Understanding-Getting-Permabanned "CAN MY PERMABAN BE REMOVED? Permabans are almost never removed. Usually by the time you have reached being permabanned, you have already been banned before. You were aware that your behavior was unacceptable according to the Terms of Use and the Summoner’s Code. Bans coming from the Instant Feedback System are generally not lifted or adjusted. Correctly placed penalties will not be removed." yes. never.
> [{quoted}](name=Inkling Commando,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4NveyOEn,comment-id=000300000000,timestamp=2019-12-06T05:01:06.902+0000) > > https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/360025054013-Understanding-Getting-Permabanned > > "CAN MY PERMABAN BE REMOVED? > Permabans are almost never removed. Usually by the time you have reached being permabanned, you have already been banned before. You were aware that your behavior was unacceptable according to the Terms of Use and the Summoner’s Code. Bans coming from the Instant Feedback System are generally not lifted or adjusted. Correctly placed penalties will not be removed." > > yes. never. There's a very important functional word in there, "almost". You seem to be ignoring the direct evidence in my link where I tallied quite a few people that had their ban reversed when the reason for their ban was cheating while the account was compromised. So clearly there are reasons that Riot will reverse bans.
: just accept it. riot never appeals restrictions or bans for any reason.
> [{quoted}](name=Inkling Commando,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4NveyOEn,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-12-05T20:12:01.483+0000) > > just accept it. riot never appeals restrictions or bans for any reason. [Never?](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/uVnmlJde-3rd-party-program-bans)
: Is there anything being done about upvote/downvote bots?
I think the mods hands are tied on this problem since it doesn't sound like they can see where upvotes/downvotes come from. If they had access to that information it would be a lot easier to handle the problem. This presumes that they can ban a player from voting on the boards. If not, it's yet another back-end programming problem related to the board and the database that stores everyone's accounts and posts.
: 10 Game Restrictive Chat For No Reason
If you were chat restricted, then you should have received chat logs of some sort when you got the restriction. You're free to post those logs if you want people's opinion on your situation.
Subdue (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Hotarµ,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=d8mU5w5w,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-12-05T19:42:23.134+0000) > > I don't know, honestly. > > On one hand I think it makes sense, on the other it completely invalidates the point of a permanent ban and it's purpose as a punishment (to remove someone from the game entirely, not just restrict them to playing with friends/premades) Technically the point of the permaban isn't just punishment, it is to keep said player from ruining the experience for others right? The above suggestion makes it less likely for the toxic player to create a new account and start all over again with lowbies.
> [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=d8mU5w5w,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-12-05T19:46:25.953+0000) > > Technically the point of the permaban isn't just punishment, it is to keep said player from ruining the experience for others right? The above suggestion makes it less likely for the toxic player to create a new account and start all over again with lowbies. That's arguable. Allowing a player to play on their banned account only under certain conditions could easily encourage them to create another account and continue playing more so than a complete ban. The 5-man pre-made games can raise their interest in the game but since it doesn't allow them full access the only option left to them when they can't scrounge up 4 other people would be to create another account. Similar to how a demo for a game can increase the chances that the customer buys the full product. Allowing the player to keep their account in some fashion also keeps the player invested in the game. Completely shutting down all progression with no hope of retrieval removes that investment motivation.
: Someone hacked my account and I got permabanned
Support ticket, let them know your account was compromised and list/link every game that you're sure wasn't you. Then ask them to check again for cheating excluding those games once you've confirmed with them that your account was stolen. [Here's a thread](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/uVnmlJde-3rd-party-program-bans) I made in the past when a lot of people were coming to the boards with this issue. So it's something that support is aware of and helps clear up with the player.
: thank you for bring me this information, it has cleared up a misinformation that was spread to me over a year ago by staff on these boards.
> [{quoted}](name=Clockwork Mouse,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=pcInTYKw,comment-id=001200000000000000020000,timestamp=2019-12-05T06:21:37.787+0000) > > thank you for bring me this information, it has cleared up a misinformation that was spread to me over a year ago by staff on these boards. I doubt they said it was impossible to remove a perma-ban. It's far more likely that they stated that Riot **wont** remove permabans not made in error. "Wont" is very different than "can't"
: You are wrong, bans are not able to be lifted. You should look more into it.
> [{quoted}](name=Clockwork Mouse,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=pcInTYKw,comment-id=0012000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-05T06:06:27.576+0000) > > You are wrong, bans are not able to be lifted. You should look more into it. A quick google search brings me this example; https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/foNLWIZA-dont-be-like-me So maybe you should take your own advice?
: Sounds like a great way to completely alienate your audience and tank your game. You know that permabanns can not be undone right? Riot literally can't do it even if they made a mistake and wanted to undo it. Or do you think that RIot would never make a mistake with such a system and that they would only ban the naughty people?
> [{quoted}](name=Clockwork Mouse,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=pcInTYKw,comment-id=00120000,timestamp=2019-12-05T05:53:33.319+0000) > > Sounds like a great way to completely alienate your audience and tank your game. You know that permabanns can not be undone right? Riot literally can't do it even if they made a mistake and wanted to undo it. > Or do you think that RIot would never make a mistake with such a system and that they would only ban the naughty people? Perma-bans are not irreversible (and there have been several cases where a perma-ban was reversed). Riot, like any online game company worth their salt, doesn't delete player data unless they absolutely had to. When a perma-ban is placed there is likely a single field in the database record that changes (Something like "isBannedUntil = 12/5/2119"). Everything else remains unchanged not only so the ban can be reversed, but also so any other record (like match history) that points to that player data can still function. Riot just doesn't reverse perma-bans unless they acknowledge that the ban was made in error.
Terozu (NA)
: Ah I was probably mistaken. I do know chat logs can factor into deciding if it was inting or not, but I was not sure if you actually got them linked.
> [{quoted}](name=Terozu,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=pcInTYKw,comment-id=001300000000,timestamp=2019-12-05T05:42:05.836+0000) > > Ah I was probably mistaken. > > I do know chat logs can factor into deciding if it was inting or not, but I was not sure if you actually got them linked. Chat could go into a manual review decision but players have come to the board after what was likely a manual review (the games in question were days old), and they showed report cards devoid of chat logs even under those cases. I wont pretend to know for sure, but it's likely that Riot support can only choose between predetermined feedback cards and I haven't seen a single person post a card that contains both match-history links and chat logs.
Terozu (NA)
: Would you mind providing chat logs? I know you were banned for briefing not flaming but I believe you still should've got some. It's possible something you said could've gotten the ban in conjunction with your gameplay.****
> [{quoted}](name=Terozu,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=pcInTYKw,comment-id=0013,timestamp=2019-12-05T05:35:11.108+0000) > > Would you mind providing chat logs? > > I know you were banned for briefing not flaming but I believe you still should've got some. It's possible something you said could've gotten the ban in conjunction with your gameplay.**** Griefing bans tend to only link the games that Riot believes the player was griefing in. No chat logs.
: He literally does it in all of his games, its common. But apparently the one time it doesn't work the guy thinks hes inting. Also experience in ranked doesn't matter btw. Even though EVERYONE THAT PLAYS IT SAYS IT DOES, the one guy WHO DOESN'T say it doesn't and ridicules us for it. Actually insane. lmao.
> [{quoted}](name=TtvCénsoredMercy,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=pcInTYKw,comment-id=0009000000010000,timestamp=2019-12-05T05:14:33.741+0000) > > He literally does it in all of his games, its common. But apparently the one time it doesn't work the guy thinks hes inting. Also experience in ranked doesn't matter btw. Even though EVERYONE THAT PLAYS IT SAYS IT DOES, the one guy WHO DOESN'T say it doesn't and ridicules us for it. Actually insane. lmao. There is a response on this page; > [{quoted}](name=2Charmnot2Charm,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=pcInTYKw,comment-id=0009000300000000,timestamp=2019-12-05T04:31:33.532+0000) > > Rank has absolutely nothing to do with this. That guy is just one of those that think people must play league 24/7 and be master+ before they can say anything to others on the board. > > > {{sticker:sg-poppy}} And they most certainly play ranked. So your statement is simply false. Hotarµ is being pretty damn respectful considering your attempts to attack their rank.
: this Bot shit is getting out of hand
I've seen the match history of a couple of players that have been banned for botting, and there is no way a human can play that number of games every day for days on end. There have been people who have quite literally [**admitted to using bots**](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/E3ZeMUwn-real-talk-riot-you-cater-to-the-mob-mentality-and-solo-players-suffer-for-it).
: someone made an ebay account with my email and got it suspended
If you never wanted to use their site, then why are you upset that your email is suspended from it?
: GG can get you banned
The user that originally posted the reddit thread, [thefakezap](https://www.reddit.com/user/thefakezap), revealed that they added one of the players after the game ended and ["discussed"](https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/e2vayq/riots_punishment_system_strikes_again/f8xrxtc/) their differences. If the ban was for private chat it would be understandable that the system would have tossed that game if \*something\* had to be shown. Probably would have been better for the punishment ticket to simply say that the user should contact support for the reason behind the ban.
: > [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=QMdW2H3E,comment-id=000300000000,timestamp=2019-11-30T16:19:22.065+0000) > > That doesn't prove that **ALL** people who troll get banned. But I never made such a claim. > > But it does prove that trolls are banned. If you have a percentage of the trollers banned your opinion would be useful ... Otherwise it isnt...
> [{quoted}](name=ThyDelutionist,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=QMdW2H3E,comment-id=0003000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-04T07:46:02.225+0000) > > If you have a percentage of the trollers banned your opinion would be useful ... Otherwise it isnt... My statement was about proving your claim to be false. No more, no less.
Ph03n1xb1rd (EUNE)
: > Infact, you can see the manipulation here where rujitra and only him has been constantly getting 20ish downvotes shortly after he posts. It only happens to him, not to others. Have you ever considered that it might be because he talks absolute bullshit in 90% of his posts? :D (The guy cant even read dates normally, but would argue with you how a liar you are, because you didn't play games on the given date (what he could not understand))
> [{quoted}](name=Ph03n1xb1rd,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4io3AAKR,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-12-03T10:18:31.162+0000) > > Have you ever considered that it might be because he talks absolute bullshit in 90% of his posts? :D (The guy cant even read dates normally, but would argue with you how a liar you are, because you didn't play games on the given date (what he could not understand)) Your opinion of rujitra is irrelevant. Getting a massive amount of downvotes within a span of a minute or two is a clear sign of vote manipulation.
Kuro SF (NA)
: support items should ONLY nerf gold UNTIL COMPLETED
Turning off the diminishing gold when no friendly champions are nearby would be counterproductive to the reason the diminishing returns was added. To discourage solo laners from taking the support items. The first suggestion sounds fine though.
: > [{quoted}](name=Periscope,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=k59Ku1y0,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-12-02T03:34:32.184+0000) > > I think the voting was a little abnormal for such a short time, so I’ve since disabled it. > > If you have any questions about this moderation action, don't hesitate to reach out to the Boards Moderation Team via: > > * The [**NA Boards Discord**](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification) > * The [**Discuss the Boards**](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation) sub-board I think you're afraid of the truth. OP knew they was right and everyone else knew they was right. you don't want to admit they is right so you abused your mods powers by giving them a big ol middle finger and disabled the votes so that others don't know if they is telling the truth or not.
> [{quoted}](name=Inkling Commando,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=k59Ku1y0,comment-id=00030004,timestamp=2019-12-03T05:43:25.033+0000) > > I think you're afraid of the truth. OP knew they was right and everyone else knew they was right. you don't want to admit they is right so you abused your mods powers by giving them a big ol middle finger and disabled the votes so that others don't know if they is telling the truth or not. I find it hard to believe you're ignorant of the vote bot present on the boards the past couple of days. The presence of the vote bot and the extreme unlikelyhood such a topic would get >20 votes in such a short timeframe makes it pretty damn obvious that the votes were applied by the votebot.
: But flaming Riot is? And cursing at them? Like I said logic OP
> [{quoted}](name=FoolishWiseMan,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=90M08VYR,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-12-03T05:08:10.338+0000) > > But flaming Riot is? And cursing at them? Like I said logic OP If you see a post that is only about flaming Riot and cursing at them, report them. But someone complaining that the client crashes is not just a bashing thread, it's a thread about a current issue they're having (and other people are having the same issue as well).
: These forums and this community is a joke anymore
The only thing your post was composed of was telling people to stop complaining with a dash of blanket insult for flavor. That's not a discussion.
Vlada Cut (EUNE)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Vlada Cut,realm=EUNE,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=mVE0Kb3d,comment-id=00030000000000020000,timestamp=2019-12-02T21:57:59.976+0000)-removed by moderation- If all you have are insults then you're not making an argument.
Jansuo (EUNE)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Jansuo,realm=EUNE,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=mVE0Kb3d,comment-id=0006000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-02T20:15:56.385+0000) > > I am just salty when it comes to naggers like you. Getting annoyed or salty doesn't mean you're exempt from the rules. Your feelings do not make you immune to the rules.
Cõmega (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=vryBqz7d,comment-id=000200000002,timestamp=2019-12-02T11:06:19.598+0000) > > So here it comes out that this has nothing to do with other players, but it’s about you thinking you’ll win more games like this. > > News flash, if you aren’t climbing, it’s because of your skill. Sure, one game may be affected by this, but in the long run it doesn’t impact your climb at all, You're dellusional if you think 1 promo game is just "one game" Losing promos because of that one game is 4 Games wasted Then you'll have to waste another to get back into promos then two more to get back where you were at before you came across that guy who's too cheap to pay his electricity bill 7 Games wasted because one guy didn't pay his bill
> [{quoted}](name=Cõmega,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=vryBqz7d,comment-id=0002000000020000,timestamp=2019-12-02T19:33:21.232+0000) > > You're dellusional if you think 1 promo game is just "one game" > > Losing promos because of that one game is 4 Games wasted > Then you'll have to waste another to get back into promos You don't lose your promos from a single lost game. You need to lose 3 of the 5 to lose promos so all three losses contribute to the lost promos. > then two more to get back where you were at before you came across that guy who's too cheap to pay his electricity bill > > 7 Games wasted > because one guy didn't pay his bill Again, there are many more reasons that a person loses power than failing to pay their electicity bill. It's far more likely that someone's power goes out due to weather, accident near utility pole, tree falling over powerline, etc. Almost all of which would be out of the hands of the player.
Jansuo (EUNE)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Jansuo,realm=EUNE,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=mVE0Kb3d,comment-id=00060000000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-02T20:07:19.375+0000) > > [Insert insult here] Well, thank you for at least proving my point I made in my first reply to you.
Jansuo (EUNE)
: Ok, so, for example, this one from my personal experience: I created a post suggesting the duo should be removed from solo/duo, so that we can have a true soloQ experience. Politely, I explained my reasoning. Someone commented "no", and nothing else. So I replied: "Scared of your true elo?" Guess what. The next day, my comment was removed for being sarcastic. Like, it is OK when someone downvotes and simply replies "no" without any reasoning. But when you give them the answer they deserve - WOHOHO NO NO NO, you are being sarcastic! Don't give a fuck about your feelings when someone downvotes + replies "no", but with your sarcastic answer, you could hurt their feelings! It has to be removed!
> [{quoted}](name=Jansuo,realm=EUNE,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=mVE0Kb3d,comment-id=000600000000,timestamp=2019-12-02T19:49:44.251+0000) > > Ok, so, for example, this one from my personal experience: > > I created a post suggesting the duo should be removed from solo/duo, so that we can have a true soloQ experience. Politely, I explained my reasoning. > > Someone commented "no", and nothing else. > > So I replied: "Scared of your true elo?" > > Guess what. The next day, my comment was removed for being sarcastic. > > Like, it is OK when someone downvotes and simply replies "no" without any reasoning. But when you give them the answer they deserve - WOHOHO NO NO NO, you are being sarcastic! Don't give a fuck about your feelings when someone downvotes + replies "no", but with your sarcastic answer, you could hurt their feelings! It has to be removed! That removal would fall under the no rank shaming and just overall being rude. You're implying that their opinion is based on them using a duo to boost their rank. It seems like a completely fair removal. You don't get to break the rules simply because you're salty that someone gave a one word opinion to your post.
Jansuo (EUNE)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=Jansuo,realm=EUNE,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=mVE0Kb3d,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2019-12-02T18:00:49.398+0000) > > Seriously, fuck off. > > Boards should have been spammed long time ago with posts like the recent ones. The problem is finally being addressed, so please, fuck off with a post like this one. Thank you. In the latest batch of people complaining about the mods, most of those that point out specific removals on their account have been shown that those removals were warranted. The vote bot wandering the boards also has a hard-on for upvoting threads that criticize the mods and downvote the mods themselves. Those two things lead me to trust the mods even further, because I would expect such people to be upset when the mods are doing their job. The only problem I see these past few days is how much some people resent having their comments taken down and refuse to accept any reasoning. They are just using this opportunity to collectively, with the help of the vote bot, make it seem like the mods are abusing power without actually having any proof to back that opinion.
Cõmega (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Sinful Succubus,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=vryBqz7d,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-12-02T07:42:38.968+0000) > > so if my power goes out for some bullshit reason out of my control, i get a ban on rank play for the next few weeks? yeah. seems totally fair! > You mean i lost my promo game because some rando didn't pay his electricity bill?
> [{quoted}](name=Cõmega,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=vryBqz7d,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-12-02T07:45:28.294+0000) > > You mean i lost my promo game because some rando didn't pay his electricity bill? Someones power can go out for reasons other than late bill payments.
Tokishi7 (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=ChickenWrap,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KFBQtJAv,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-12-02T05:16:50.410+0000) > > I think you guys are, _once again_ intentionally taking every single thing I've said to you out of context in order to make me look bad. > > Oh well, what can you do? What Riot support does when they penalize players, have to be the role model man
> [{quoted}](name=Tokishi7,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KFBQtJAv,comment-id=00000002,timestamp=2019-12-02T07:35:13.967+0000) > > What Riot support does when they penalize players, have to be the role model man The boards have different behavioral rules than the game. Even different subsections of the boards have different rules from each other.
BBKong (NA)
: LOL the upvote bot came back. Fun
> [{quoted}](name=BBKong,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=KFBQtJAv,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-12-02T06:16:40.103+0000) > > LOL the upvote bot came back. Fun There's quite a bit of irony in the votebot spamming downvote/upvote in an attempt to fling mud at moderators. If a moderator is pissing off someone who's willing to use a vote bot then the moderator is doing their job.
Bultz (NA)
: It's time Riot had a hard look at player mods and removed them
So you had several valid post removals, and a moderator decided to see if this was a pattern in your behavior and found other infractions? That's not moderator abuse.
: Is there no such thing as actual fair team matching?
>my last say 10 games. I've been getting placed into matches where I get a team that is prone to rage quitting after dying many times against teams that are fully together and play as if they're in ranked. Not sure how Riot is suppose to be able to tell who's going to rage quit before it actually happens. >But I can't get upset at all. Like getting upset will get me banned You're free to get upset. But you're still responsible for your actions even if you're upset. > but purposely joining a game and fucking it up to the point where its a one sided curb stomp on the jaw and then leaving only 15 minutes in is perfectly fair. And those who keep the game hostage after it is just the daily game. If they're rage quitting then that implies that they intended on playing seriously, did poorly, and quit in a rage. Riot doesn't take as heavy of a hand on disconnects or leaves because from Riot's perspective they can't be sure why any one person disconnects. Legitimate leaves (IRL emergency, power outage, internet problems, etc) look the same as illegitimate ones.
: what exquisite hypocrisy you assert my motive and intention with this post, and that of everyone on this board, but I'm not allowed to with the throwers intent
> [{quoted}](name=Best At Sucking,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=k59Ku1y0,comment-id=0003000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-02T04:03:06.085+0000) > > what exquisite hypocrisy > > you assert my motive and intention with this post, and that of everyone on this board, but I'm not allowed to with the throwers intent Getting >20 votes in this section of the boards in such a short timeframe is beyond suspicious. Especially when your topic isn't exactly a rare one (neither is the tone). "No consequences for trolling but insulting the troll gets you banned" is not a fresh thread. Both trolling and poor chat behavior is bannable. Trolls do get banned (I can link you threads where people were banned for intentional feeding if you wish). But trolls are much harder to catch than poor chat behavior because Riot wants to avoid banning players for **unintentionally** playing poorly. This leaves a lot of grey area where Riot errs on the side of caution and doesn't ban. Poor chat behavior is against the rules regardless of what you think of the other player. Just as intentional feeding is against the rules regardless of what you think of the other player.
rujitra (NA)
: So there is no benefit of the doubt? Had it been deleted and just said “this may not be as common a reference” that’d be fine. But it’s apparently punishable to use a reference the mod team doesn’t like. In no way can it be interpreted me saying they should watch a kids show. It is clear even if you don’t know the show that my reference is ONLY to the theme song, and even still only a specific lyric of that theme song. I am not saying “go watch a kids show” **because it’s a kids show**, I’m saying it because of the theme song. It can in no way be interpreted as insulting if it is read for what it actually says.
> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=zPIsqnUm,comment-id=0002000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-02T01:06:27.467+0000) > > So there is no benefit of the doubt? Had it been deleted and just said “this may not be as common a reference” that’d be fine. But it’s apparently punishable to use a reference the mod team doesn’t like. > > In no way can it be interpreted me saying they should watch a kids show. It is clear even if you don’t know the show that my reference is ONLY to the theme song, and even still only a specific lyric of that theme song. I am not saying “go watch a kids show” **because it’s a kids show**, I’m saying it because of the theme song. It can in no way be interpreted as insulting if it is read for what it actually says. I can only tell you what I thought the removal was for. Telling me that it was impossible to not know it was a reference to a theme song is silly, because I'm someone that you had to explain it to before I knew what you were talking about. Is it because I'm dense? Sure, could be. But my original point remains the same if the mod was in the boat of ignorance as me.
rujitra (NA)
: So it's because it's a show on Disney channel? I don't see that as belittling at all... like really? It was also *clearly* a reference to the theme song of "best of both worlds" and clearly *not* saying anything about the *specific show*. Like, I think that's the reasoning I'm going to get, but it's completely BS that they can remove something for a *possible* interpretation that *clearly* isn't what was said in the post. Further it assumes that someone should think watching Hannah Montana is belittling.
> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=zPIsqnUm,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-12-02T00:48:54.783+0000) > > So it's because it's a show on Disney channel? I don't see that as belittling at all... like really? It was also *clearly* a reference to the theme song of "best of both worlds" and clearly *not* saying anything about the *specific show*. I don't know what the theme song is of Hanna Montana, so the reference went cleanly over my head. As I imagine it would for anyone else that doesn't watch the show. Since I didn't get the reference the only possible connection left to me was that it was intended to belittle given the context of the post (telling someone to not play multiplayer games). > Like, I think that's the reasoning I'm going to get, but it's completely BS that they can remove something for a *possible* interpretation that *clearly* isn't what was said in the post. Further it assumes that someone should think watching Hannah Montana is belittling. Someone can make the same argument about getting a removal from telling someone to go play Hello Kitty. At minimum, the target audience for Hannah Montana is a much younger crowd and people who don't watch the show attribute it as such (a kids show).
: there should be a way to leave a game early without penalty if your team is full of jerks
For such a system to work Riot would need to be able to accurately tell who was fulfilling your criteria of, "act like assholes" mid game, and that it applied to all of your teammates (you shouldn't be allowed to punish the remaining person just because the other 3 people were being a jerk). And that sort of detection system is not going to happen. You're going to just have to deal with your teammates, regardless of their behavior, to the conclusion of the game. Mute them if you don't want to see their chat, report them at the end of the game if you feel like the report is justified.
rujitra (NA)
: Confusing
Here's how I see that particular removal; Telling people to instead go on Disney+ and Hanna Montana is really just a recommendation intended to belittle the other person. To liken it to an opposing viewpoint, it would be like telling someone who believes it's fair to punish others for poor behavior to go play Hello Kitty.
Show more

AeroWaffle

Level 48 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion