: Permabanned carryover
To answer your question: No. I'm also going to lock the thread because "stop getting permabanned" is not an appropriate response to the question. Also because the question itself isn't even a Player Behavior topic and should have been posted in GD or AtC.
Manxxom (NA)
: [removed by moderation]
lmao, goofed me. {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
Awf Meta (NA)
: Comment Removed
>It was a statement of fact. The Black Plague was caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis. The Russo-Japanese War primarily occurred between 1904-1905. These are **actual** statements of facts. Neither is a topic fit for the Boards. >I guess you could call the U.S.A. constitution politics? Yes, the United States Constitution is the framework for the government of the US. It is inherently political. >Then again, I've seen a lot "politics" allowed on this board. As Periscope mentioned in his removal, certain discussions are allowed on a case-by-case basis. _Typically_, those discussions involving socio-political discussions are tied to the on-goings of the internet, gaming, or Riot/League. >I'm confused why stating the constitution would be crossing the line. Not sure which North American constitution you're referring to here, but you stated, "In the land of the free, there is slavery." which is not included in any North American constitution that I'm aware of. If it were, it would likewise be removed for socio-political.
Poske (EUNE)
: So Riot doesn't endorse Duo Boosting ?????? WHY DOES IT EVEN EXIST THEN?
Discuss civilly or don't discuss at all. Only warning that will be given here.
: I'm suspended (understandably), but it's a little complicated
Well, what you quoted was just our guidelines here on the Boards. Admittedly, there is crossover between those tenants and the ToU. I'd say you were suspended simply because the evidence against you was more easily provable _by a robot_ than what your Vladimir did. I think what they did is undoubtedly shitty and rage-inducing, but two wrong turns doesn't necessarily put everyone in the right direction. I'd take some of what you posted here and submit a ticket and see where that leads you. It might not answer all or any of your questions, but you don't really lose anything from it either. Best of luck to you in the future.
RedDonky (NA)
: I never meant to suggest that there are more sub-honor 2 players than those who are at or above (that would imply a downright ridiculous level of toxicity in the playerbase). But it certainly looks like a lot more than the 'you are part of the 0.2%' or whatever the tiny number was players who have been punished for unsportsmanlike conduct.
> [{quoted}](name=RedDonky,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=X0Rj4v32,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-02-15T18:43:21.483+0000) > > I never meant to suggest that there are more sub-honor 2 players than those who are at or above (that would imply a downright ridiculous level of toxicity in the playerbase). But it certainly looks like a lot more than the 'you are part of the 0.2%' or whatever the tiny number was players who have been punished for unsportsmanlike conduct. You could be right for sure. I think it's about time for us to see a Dev blog post about PB. Sort of like a year in review.
RedDonky (NA)
: Now that we can see teammate honor levels on pregame load screens...
I don't think so. **I could be wrong...**, but I highly doubt that your interactions with a couple hundred players appropriately reflects a change in statistics regarding the _millions_ of people playing League across the world. Additionally, if your hypothesis is correct that there are more honor 0-1 players than 2+, that inherently means more people are getting punished ("controlled"). As for whether or not the added feature adds to toxicity... I mean, can any of us really say accurately whether that is the case or not?
: My post in Memes & Games was unfairly removed.
I'll copy and paste what I posted in your other thread here: A random lone picture does not a meme make, which is why it was removed and recommended you post it in GD. I'd also note that the removal doesn't count against you, despite posting in the incorrect sub in the past. However, insulting other people, or volunteers, will result in an action against your account. I've given you the benefit of the doubt this time around and simply edited the offending portion of your comment out this time (twice) -- there won't be a 3rd chance given.
: Pic removed from Memes & Games??
A lone picture does not a meme make, which is why it was removed and recommended you post it here in GD. I'd also note that the removal doesn't count against you, despite posting in the incorrect sub in the past. Insulting other people, or volunteers, **will** result in an action against your account. I've given you the benefit of the doubt this time around and simply edited the offending portion of your comment out this time and there won't be an additional chance given. As you've also made a post regarding that removal on DtB I will be locking this and you're more than welcome to continue **civil** discussion on that post. If you continue to insult other people or post the same topic on more than one sub we will start penalizing you. If you have any questions about where you should post or what is allowed, drop us a line on the [Moderation Discord](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification) or make a post at [Discuss the Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation).
xAcidik (NA)
: Jungle Mains Are Saints
I'd say one of the highlights here is you recognized an unwinnable and "useless" argument that you knew wasn't worth your time and **you chose** to disengage. As long as "defending yourself" wasn't flaming the Morg into purgatory, then kudos to you. I hope you have many more enjoyable games in the future!
: Banning Players From Ranked Play Only!
I think the inherent problem with this is that it further capitulates the idea that norms can't be serious. I play normals sometimes and play to win. Even though it's not as upsetting to lose a norm than a ranked game, I see a lot of people use the "it's just norms" defense to grief or stop trying. There's also a large population of players who only play norms. I don't know the statistical difference, but if you banned a **toxic** person from ranked I'd bet they're just going to take the same toxic mentality to norms.
lzunavi (EUW)
: Can't find the account transfer?
There's a known bug and account transfers won't be fixed until ~February.
Awf Meta (NA)
: Chat
I actually don't think this is a bad idea. Communication is definitely going to increase your chances of winning, _BUT_ that is completely dependent on what is being communicated. I would say though that not opting-in for comms is basically the same as /muteall
TimoTry (EUW)
: I got hacked and then banned for scripting
If you're the actual account owner you won't lose your account over this. I had someone login to my account, use my last skin refund, and gift themselves or a friend a skin. I got it sorted out very quickly as soon as I verified I was the true account holder, and I expect something similar for you as well.
: Riot Support and Reports are Garbage
All comments have been based on available information to us (players) which is match history and in-game stats. Periscope also **did** point out that he saw someone in one of your games he believed should be investigated, but you conveniently ignored that point. 1/15 is suspicious, but it isn't enough without some kind of footage -- which again, isn't available to us as players -- to review. Just so you're aware, Riot typically bans certain offenses in waves (such as boosters) which _may_ be why you didn't see your reported player get banned for several months. Additionally, there are 27 **MILLION** people who play League **every** **day.**There's approximately 2500 Rioters across 24 offices. Narrow that to just NA. Then narrow that further to the specific team who handles in-game suspensions. It is literally impossible to expect those folks to manage 27 **MILLION** players _per day_ and investigate every claim made in a ticket the same day or even week.
: Bot lane inting after Lux wouldn't let Ryze solo baron
It sucks. Has happened to me before, and always when I’m either upset or super driven to win. If they talked about inting in chat you should submit a ticket!
Saezio (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=rga8fqNj,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2019-01-16T00:19:10.402+0000) > > Because the idea of being an honorable player is dynamically opposed to the idea of being a toxic player. If you are toxic enough that the system flags your behavior, you are not being honorable, no matter how many awards you get from other players. This is because there is no way to ensure that honor is given for truly honorable behavior: you can give it to anyone you want, for any reason. > > The other factor is that not everything is equal. *League* takes toxicity very seriously, and a few games of fine behavior do not justify the one where you ruin the game for your teammates with foul behavior. > > There *is* some leeway built into the system, but it is not related to honor because -- as mentioned earlier -- there is no system ensuring that honor is only given for truly honorable actions, but there *is* a system ensuring that punishments are only given for toxic actions. Ok sure honors by players are subjective, but what I am asking here is What do people think should be the number of good behaviour games between 2 bad behaviour games for it not to raise any flags. (provided it is not hate or racism or the other disgusting things people can say online)
> [{quoted}](name=Saezio,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=rga8fqNj,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2019-01-16T00:24:27.879+0000) > > Ok sure honors by players are subjective, but what I am asking here is > What do people think should be the number of good behaviour games between 2 bad behaviour games for it not to raise any flags. (provided it is not hate or racism or the other disgusting things people can say online) There shouldn't be because it is extremely exploitable and because no amount of past good behavior should **completely** excuse bad behavior. Context, if anything, could be considered to **marginally** adjust punishments, but it is way too resource dependent.
Saezio (EUNE)
: Shouldn't it go both ways?
Resource dependence is a large part of why reports/honors will never be equal. I also question the morality of diminishing negative behavior because of past good behavior -- as well as being fairly exploitable. Courts in the US (even traffic/magistrate courts) utilize mitigating/aggravating circumstances, one of those being past behavior. But they never use them to try and **completely** balance the scale because we still need to be judged in the present for the most part. To one of your points though... I think not allowing enemies to honor each other is completely ludicrous for exactly the reason you pointed out. I understand their logic: we want as many chances to find bad behavior as we possibly can. Like you mentioned though, why shouldn't we also be looking for chances to find **great behavior** as well? I _hate_ the fixation with finding negativity. I understand its purpose, but I hate the attitude that comes with it. It's why I will argue against increasing IFS penalty notifications for the reporters _all.day.long_.
Nhifu (NA)
: Why is trolling not regarded as highly as toxic chat?
I pinned PH45's response because it is genuinely the most concise and accurate answer. I'd also add two things to their explanation: 1) You can always manually submit a ticket with evidence and you'll at least get confirmation that the case is being reviewed. Like PH45 and others noted, it is exceptionally easier to prove toxicity via chat than it is via review because reviewing in-game is so much more resource dependent. 2) The IFS (Instant Feedback System) only returns to the player whose report triggers the system. I don't believe it is a perfect system. It is a *functional* system. Rioters would rather a guilty player keep playing than an innocent player be punished.
: Finally at peace with League of Legends.
As the OP has indicated they are not here to discuss I will be closing the thread. Any further questions regarding this thread or action should be brought to [Discuss the Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation) or our [Moderation Discord](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification).
TR Seth (EUW)
: why do ı have to lose because of my teammates
I snipped your image. We don't allow naming and shaming on any kind here. You may feel free to repost the image if you censor out your teammates' names. Also, it is possible to 1v9. Not easily, but it is possible.
: > [{quoted}](name=KFCeytron,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=wk178rjw,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-10T07:33:42.156+0000) > > You misunderstand me. The opinion isn&#x27;t that a man chained, imprisoned, and surviving on rats for 15 years wouldn&#x27;t have a super chiseled, muscular body, groomed head, facial, _and_ chest hair, and not a speck of dirt on him. That&#x27;s a simple fact. > > The opinion is that it&#x27;s fine to make threads about it and not fine to relegate all criticism to one easily-buried thread. Does it fucking matter though it’s a game and in this game it’s a fantasy <Removed by Moderation>
> [{quoted}](name=speedameen,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=wk178rjw,comment-id=0000000000000001,timestamp=2019-01-10T14:34:11.343+0000) > > Does it fucking matter though it’s a game and in this game it’s a fantasy &lt;Removed by Moderation&gt; Leave the deriding comments at home. And just because it's fantasy doesn't mean it shouldn't make sense. Part of what makes great fantasies _great_ is that you can immerse yourself without going, "Wow, this makes zero fucking sense."
JWFZ (EUW)
: My solo/dou boarder is downgrade to sliver
Locking as question is answered. In the future, topics of this kind belong in **Ask the Community**. Discuss the Boards is designed for Boards specific inquiries and feedback.
: > [{quoted}](name=KFCeytron,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zH2scJZE,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-01-02T04:24:28.649+0000) > > Title: &quot;So I am considering buying 2 in 1 laptop&quot; > First sentence of post: &quot;But still not sure what it is ?&quot; > > Like, why? Why would you be considering buying something when you don&#x27;t know what it is? Wouldn&#x27;t it make a ton more sense to explain the tasks you have in mind and then ask what device would be appropriate for those tasks? > > My suggestion is that you do more research on Google, which definitely has lots of resources about these things. Read reviews, look at manufacturer websites, read threads in existing forums, etc. Uh, ok it is the last time I waste my time on you. Not sure is not equal to don't know. I do have a basic understanding of what it is. I did explain the task I need, if you are unable to read over 1 sentence it is your problem. Now stop trolling me.
> [{quoted}](name=Paravozikchoocho,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zH2scJZE,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-02T04:39:16.606+0000) > > Uh, ok it is the last time I waste my time on you. > Not sure is not equal to don&#x27;t know. I do have a basic understanding of what it is. > I did explain the task I need, if you are unable to read over 1 sentence it is your problem. > Now stop trolling me, &lt;Removed by Moderation&gt;. I've removed a violating portion of your comment. Refrain from being condescending and/or derogatory or actions against your account will escalate.
Federal (NA)
: Permaban doesnt seem standard <Removed by Moderation>
> [{quoted}](name=Federal,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=eMgLkvkP,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2019-01-02T21:42:07.127+0000) > > Permaban doesnt seem standard &lt;Removed by Moderation&gt; I've removed a violating portion of your comment. Continued violations will result in escalated actions. Additionally, there is no "defending yourself" in a chat-box. The **best** thing you can do is document and report. Threats are taken extremely seriously and handled very accordingly. Engaging them simply fuels the fire. Your only option now would be to submit a ticket and explain your side of the case.
: Renekton is unbearably as oppressive as the other champs when ahead. <Removed by Moderation>, doesn't make him any less of an oppressive champ.
> [{quoted}](name=Brain Errör 404,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9U6WNKes,comment-id=000100000001,timestamp=2019-01-03T12:48:34.436+0000) > > Renekton is unbearably as oppressive as the other champs when ahead.<Removed by Moderation>, doesn&#x27;t make him any less of an oppressive champ. You can make your point without being condescending. Anything further will result in escalated action.
: PSA: Zyra and Brand are NOT supports
We all -- mostly -- love the game and we're arguing to try and express ourselves with the common goal of making the game more enjoyable/better. Please chill on the condescending jibes and one-liners or we will start taking more aggressive actions.
: So what is riot's stance on bought accounts, but for educational uses?
There's so much of it going around that bans generally go out in large waves, but it's a lot like trying to cure the plague with a can of Lysol. Per your question to Djinn: there was a pro player who was recently reprimanded for playing on a bought account while bootcamping in Korea (or something similar) as opposed to the account given to them by Riot. So it _is in fact_ something that is enforced on all levels.
: can someone explain why people are allowed to be toxic pregame
Pre-game chat without actually playing the game is simply a case of "words will never hurt me". They take a ding for leaving (which will escalate if they continually do so) **and** they don't negatively affect your _gameplay_ experience. The only downside for us is we waste a bit of time and earn some frustration. The benefits outweigh the negatives in my opinion. I always have puush open though and have used it many times when submitting tickets if I feel so obliged. Most of the time I'm just relieved they dodge and lose lp lol.
: Bannable?
I'm glad your ban was in error and it was reversed. As it was deemed an inappropriate punishment by Riot I'll be closing the thread. I have also removed your link to your teammates profile. **Naming and shaming is not allowed** and is unnecessary -- please refrain from doing so in the future. If you have any questions about what you can/can't post feel free to drop us a line on [Discuss the Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation) or on our [Moderation Discord](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification).
Neosphoros (EUNE)
: Removal of the topic - "Is the LOL is PAY4WIN type of game?"
The burden of proof is on you to have substantive evidence to support your claims. You have nothing substantive from your post as Ulanopo has detailed. As for your defense: >**My conclusion are based on my observation same as other players opinion can be based on their private observation. . .** This is fine, but you provided no concrete evidence to support your observations. >**No one has presented any just enough evidence to undermine my topic. . .** >**If none of those sides was proved it is impossible that someone is right or not. Therefore, my statement that "MMR is a lie" can not be assessed as a lie,** These are called appeals to ignorance and they are fallacious (false) statements. See [here](https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/56/Argument-from-Ignorance) for more info. >**therefore removing it only because - you can ... is a manifestation of intolerance.** This is a false-cause argument and is likewise fallacious. See [here](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause). >**if the only argument is that MMR works properly that - it works properly because... for some player - it works properly.** Nobody has made this claim.
HACKSFE1 (EUW)
: Toxic players
Make sure to use the post-game report. If you want to go above and beyond, visit the link I'll attach below and fill out a ticket with Player Support and include all the info. https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new
ExxonV (NA)
: When eating a shit sandwich
You've admitted here in the comments you're aware you violated rules by taking the bait of griefers stating, "I'd just gotten enough of those people that night that I wasn't dealing with it again." As for your fixation that anyone here is defending players who do this to other people - yeah, not sure where you're getting that. Nobody here is defending people who go in games and try to trigger folks. Everyone here has told you to chill your heater because they've probably experienced the same thing you did at some point. Additionally, despite your zeal that Riot does absolutely nothing, it's just blatantly false. I and plenty of others have reported chat baiting we've experienced and seen those accounts go radio silent. Yeah, it's anecdotal, but that's all we have access to at this point and it's more reliable than your empty claim. If you don't keep up with those people, how could you possibly know if they get banned or not? Plus, those people are going to do the same thing everyone else does: create a new account and continue to grief. Everyone is telling you to keep your head because regardless of how many suspensions go out you're going to run into these people eventually. tl'dr: Your explosion is their high and you gave it to them. /muteall every game and it'll be much more pleasant for you.
rujitra (NA)
: i promise this isn't me (and I actually disagree with a lot of what this OP said). I think the idea of closing threads that are solved or deevolving into circular arguments is kinda a great idea, but.... that takes a lot of work and quickrecognition.
You're right on about the recognition bit. Hopefully as we add more specialists you guys will be able to help us a bit more on this front.
: Player chat restrictions
There was another thread regarding PB a couple days ago and we're starting to see more and more of them. I'm sure everyone agrees that venting is sometimes the best way to get a clear visual on a situation. We can probably also agree that some folks simply come to Player Behavior with the mindset that they couldn't possibly be in the wrong. To your points: You mentioned making the threads easier to delete because they're basically just spam. We're trying to find the good line between letting people vent their case in a controlled environment and locking down/removing content that is blatantly rule-breaking (being racist, sexist, rank-shaming, etc.) Unless the poster is doing something super egregious in the thread itself like I mentioned, we're really not gonna be removing much because some people genuinely don't understand that they're being toxic lol. One of the purposes of PB is to provide insight for punished players. Vets like y'all it might find it a little hectic to sift through the same type of scenario you've solved dozens of times, but those posters generally aren't as seasoned. Yeah, some people could get their questions answered by reading other threads, but I think everyone deserves to -- at the very least -- have their individual voice heard. However, we could probably do a better job of closing threads that have been clearly solved or threads that have just run themselves in circles. As for making a specific board: we've tossed around the idea internally and it has been something discussed here as well. It obv. won't be something that happens tomorrow, but it could... it'll need to be discussed more on our side. Ulanopo mentioned this in another thread, but we really want to avoid Board congestion. Also, I don't really think it would be super resourceful to create a Board for appeals since Rioters don't have the ability to monitor something like that at this time and suspension appeals is done solely through them.
ChuShoe (NA)
: How? Just because you're post gets downvoted doesn't mean what you said gets deleted Unless it's incredibly dumb or insensitive Then it just straight gets hidden But I've never seen someone who makes a fair argument go beyond that downvote limit, so unless you're really sensitive to the idea of your comment being disliked by someone else, I don't really see why they're such big deals. Unless you're ~~avangelion w1nks~~, then you pretty much comment something everyone is going to hate on a thread and get below -100
> [{quoted}](name=ChuShoe,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=PKA4uGwU,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-12-27T00:14:47.542+0000) > > But I&#x27;ve never seen someone who makes a fair argument go beyond that downvote limit, so unless you&#x27;re really sensitive to the idea of your comment being disliked by someone else, I don&#x27;t really see why they&#x27;re such big deals. > This happens all the time actually, **especially** when someone introduces an opinion that doesn't jive with the "status quo". And to the point someone else made: >Voting, up or down, is a way of showing if you approve or disapprove of someone's idea, opinion, suggestion, etc. You can also show your disapproval by actually contributing something tangible to the discussion. We have this phenomenon nowadays where people simply want to express "like/dislike" without actually giving a "why?" (either because they don't want to be subjected to criticism or because they haven't taken the time to consider what they're actually agreeing or disagreeing with). The point of a discussion is to reach the most beneficial and effective outcome for all parties as realistically as possible. That's the ideal outcome. If someone has an idea and all you want to do is express dislike, that's fine I guess. But when those ideas get implemented because you or someone else hasn't given a reasonable counter-proposal, you've actually done yourself the injustice.
rujitra (NA)
: I completely agree that people should be able to be wrong. However, does it really serve the players who are legitimately not understanding their punishment if people are allowed to be wrong? Again, this would be applied extremely narrowly so as to not prohibit legitimate discussion over the validity of the rules/system. Players who post saying "Why is this punishable" are not served well at all if the responses they get are "I don't agree this is punishable" or "This isn't toxic". While those are perfectly valid opinions, they don't help the player - and instead they may in fact encourage the player that the "problem isn't me, but Riot" - which doesn't serve them well in preventing further punishments nor does it serve the community well in preventing toxicity. Again, this isn't a blanket ban on dissent - people would still be able to identify why someone was punished and encourage them if they disagree to post another thread about the system. Further, if an OP questions why the policy is the case, people would be able to voice their opinion on the policy. My suggestion *mainly* applies to first or low level comments which are responses to "Why was I punished" with comments such as "Th policy sucks" or "This isn't toxic, because Riot's snowflakes" or "because Riot caters to people who can't mute".
> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=EOYq1189,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-12-27T01:46:20.854+0000) Hey! I’ll chime in here to drop my two cents. Personally, I don’t see a problem with the narrow scope you provided in your last paragraph. Howver, this is honestly something of a “needs better moderation” clarity as opposed to a “needs additional rule” issue. If someone replies to a thread as “this system is dumb, you shouldn’t be banned for that”, I would call that a low quality/low effort post, and we already have a rule in place covering exactly that. There’s two lines of thought that diverge here: a) the precedent of how we interpet that rule in general, and b) how zealously do we apply that interpretation to PB. We’ve typically interpreted the low effort rule as the “shit post” rule. Pretty straightforward. In terms of enforcement, we’ve been pretty lax about how we apply that rule (I.e., a bit more so in PB, a lot less in GD). Gameplay+ changed the game. Ever since I joined the team we’ve discussed how to make PB less of a whining ground and more of the teaching environment you’ve hinted at a couple of times. Stricter enforcement of existing rules was always something on everyone’s lips (especially former Arbiters like Ulanopo who are the historic PB attendant experts). With Gameplay+ we now have a hyper regimented and strictly enforced section of the Boards where posted content is at a high level - I think people like you and others are realizing this same concept can be applied elsewhere. So, I agree with where your train of thought is beginning. But, like Ulanopo, I think adding a new rule prohibiting certain speech isn’t the correct destination. However, I think this is a good time for us to start considering if this community is interested in something like a PB+ or if simply tightening the reins on how we enforce our existing rules (which are nearly all-inclusive) would help. I’d also add that a lot of people who come to PB aren’t looking for an explanation, they’re looking for affirmation that they were wrongly punished. Gameplay+ works because there’s a lot of detail in gameplay. PB systems have some complexity, but ultimately if you use racial slurs or cuss some person out in your game it’s pretty apparent where the problem lies. Additionally, the available solutions are finite and at the end of the day we can give all the advice and wisdom in the world, but we can’t control the keyboard in game.
Jikker (NA)
: Time for another weather complaint thread
Meanwhile in the South (heart and soul of the US of A, land of biscuits and gravy, sweet tea, and Coke (not Coca-Cola or pop, you filthy yanks))... it's just rainy and cold and rainy.
: Got perm'd for stating a fact
I'll remind everyone in the thread that flaming, name-calling, or making derogatory remarks - whether direct or indirect - is not allowed and is strictly **against** the mission of the Player Behavior sub-board. Rein it in.
rujitra (NA)
: There is a difference between debating and being combative. In a a debate, both parties come to the table with an open mind and attempt to win the other side over with logic - directly responding to logical arguments with logical counterarguments. You, on the other hand, have responded to every argument by saying "that's not toxic you're wrong". That is not logical, and it is not a counterargument. It is **purely** combative. You further display this attitude in your games - you attempt to prove you have the proverbial "bigger dick" by flaming whoever you can for the loss - be it because they're afk or because they fed. Your attitude **is** the problem. And your ban **is** appropriate, because your attitude is a problem. <Removed by Moderation> you aren't always right, and even when you are right, you don't have to make it known to everyone. Be gracious in victory and humble in defeat. It's not hard.
> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ZjManp8Z,comment-id=0006000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-12-20T04:30:35.567+0000) > > There is a difference between debating and being combative. > > In a a debate, both parties come to the table with an open mind and attempt to win the other side over with logic - directly responding to logical arguments with logical counterarguments. > > You, on the other hand, have responded to every argument by saying &quot;that&#x27;s not toxic you&#x27;re wrong&quot;. That is not logical, and it is not a counterargument. It is **purely** combative. You further display this attitude in your games - you attempt to prove you have the proverbial &quot;bigger dick&quot; by flaming whoever you can for the loss - be it because they&#x27;re afk or because they fed. Your attitude **is** the problem. And your ban **is** appropriate, because your attitude is a problem. > > &lt;Removed by Moderation&gt; you aren&#x27;t always right, and even when you are right, you don&#x27;t have to make it known to everyone. Be gracious in victory and humble in defeat. It&#x27;s not hard. As I mentioned to someone else, you make extremely valid and good arguments in the first portion of your comment. Do not fall on your own sword and ruin otherwise sound reason with belligerence.
Escheton (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=DeceasedL0ved0ne,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ZjManp8Z,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2018-12-20T02:40:46.864+0000) > > You&#x27;re just using an overblown example. And you&#x27;re including **_repeatedly,_** which OP didn&#x27;t do. > > No, facts can&#x27;t be negative and toxic. What&#x27;s negative about your example is that you&#x27;re hypothetically doing it for no purposed but to hurt people&#x27;s feelings--- and loitering, which is the most important reason you&#x27;d be kicked out. > > Stating that people die when they get old is not negative. Just as saying people die when their brains stop functioning isn&#x27;t. Sure, it may not be polite, but no one should be saying their fucking grandmother died to strangers on a video game in the first place. Facts are facts. However, your choice of which to use and when, certainly can be negative and toxic. Especially when considering situational subtext. <Removed by Moderation> Suuuuubtext.
> [{quoted}](name=Escheton,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ZjManp8Z,comment-id=000200000001,timestamp=2018-12-20T19:30:01.560+0000) > > Facts are facts. However, your choice of which to use and when, certainly can be negative and toxic. Especially when considering situational subtext. > > &lt;Removed by Moderation&gt; > > Suuuuubtext. I get that you're trying to highlight your point, but you went over the line by being unnecessarily belligerent through implication. You made a sound and concise argument with your first three sentences, so leave it at that.
HACKSFE1 (EUW)
: Riot Support is a joke
HACKSFE1, I get your frustration, but derogatory remarks/name calling is not acceptable here and are in violation of our Golden Rule found [here](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/ITFIpNUE). I've removed the violating portions of your comment. Future violations will lead to increased punishments. As for your question, as several here have stated, account transfers are temporarily disabled due to some issues. If you have any questions regarding what is acceptable content, reach out to us on the [Boards Discord](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification) or [Discuss the Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation). -Articus43
: from reading why leage got banned in china
Just a head up - it is totally O.K. to discuss this topic as it's directly related to the state of League/Riot. However, in your speculations leave the political commentary and jibes to the side. If this devolves into a game of politics then we'll either be locking or removing the thread. -Articus43
: 10$ the darius from last game isnt banned.
SoullessFLunky and all, If you have nothing constructive (and civil) to add to the discussion then please refrain from posting at all. Continually passive-aggressively mocking others is not acceptable. This is an official warning to you and all others. Additionally, I will also be locking this thread as it holds little to no discussion worthy value. If you have any questions regarding what is appropriate, or this action in particular please reach out to the moderation team on the Moderation Discord or create a discussion on our Discuss the Boards sub-board. -Articus43
: Arclight Vel'koz can make his Q invisible.
Watched this on my phone and I can follow the two spiraling orbs (leading Q animation) just behind the W animation every time. It was easier when you shot them at angles. I concede that it’s somewhat easier because I was looking for it and I didn’t have diverted attention (my own champion, minions, minimap, etc). I’d personally liken this to Yasuo hiding his Q animation behind wind wall and double TP. Like AeroWaffle mentioned, I think there’s just a bit of visual noise to look through - especially with the bright color and glow of the visuals.
Dstruck (NA)
: ITs too asy to get restricted
http://puu.sh/BMbDH/5ee5434466.png This is a final warning and reminder to those following this discussion that all opinions should be civil and respectful. All others will be pruned accordingly. As always, if anyone has any questions regarding what is appropriate, please reach out to the moderation team on the [Moderation Discord](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification) or create a discussion on our [Discuss the Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation) sub-board.
Dstruck (NA)
: Apparently people think that petty tiny insults or typing a paragraph or 2
Dstruck71, I will be locking this thread as it is essentially the same thread you created previously. You may continue the discussion **in a respectful manner** [here](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/pebF0Erd-its-too-asy-to-get-restricted). Everyone involved should be reminded that the Universal Rules and ToS specifically prohibit flaming, trolling, etc - i.e. remain civil. If you have any questions regarding where a post belongs, what is appropriate, or this action in particular please reach out to the moderation team on the [Moderation Discord](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification). -Articus43
: Bots > toxic players.
Heimerdingering, While it is completely acceptable to hold contentious opinions, and to express them in frustration is equally acceptable, this thread has flown off the rails in terms of what is acceptable here on the Boards. Implying/advocating for rule breaking (even sardonically) and pointless name calling is not acceptable here as this sub is intended for genuine questions and suggestions regarding player behavior and those relevant systems. Those wishing to further discuss the topic of bots, ban waves, etc. may find several other threads of the same topic to post in, or create a new discussion in a civil manner. If there are any questions regarding where a post belongs, what is appropriate, or this action in particular please reach out to the moderation team on the [Moderation Discord](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification). -Articus43
: Improving Report Feedback
I'll start by saying that I agree the system as a whole needs a re-look and overhaul. However, for this particular suggestion I see two major problems: 1) It feeds into the vindictive / retaliatory mindset which are both undesirable traits in a fair and unbiased punishment system. This could be equated to giving a trophy to a citizen who reports a legitimate crime. Do citizens get recognized for reporting crimes? Yes, sometimes. However, that is done to encourage people to participate in communication with law enforcement more so than to make reporting a crime some kind of commodity to be earned. You may see social media posts from your local agencies thanking citizens for participating in the justice process, but you're not going to see those agencies tally numbers for those people. 2) As my last sentence implies, it has the strong ability to turn the system, which _should be_ seen as a "duty", into a "game" where you earn prestige for participating. There is a lot of potential for abuse here and having to mitigate that abuse (false reports) because people are looking to up their numbers pushes this well beyond a simple "quality of life" change. Punishment systems, at the ideal level, should be impartial and unbiased. We as participants should feel obligated to report bad behavior not because it earns us renown, but because a) the community will benefit from less inappropriate conduct and b) our personal experience will be better because we don't have to deal with undesirables. Will this ever work 100% of the time at 100% effectiveness? No. It has to be as efficient as possible as fairly as possible. The foundation of a system (or a feature of that system, such as this) which rewards some innate desire for personal retribution is, very simply, biased and skewed, period. If people want to see proof of a system functioning, then perhaps Riot should release recurring statistics on actions taken overall. Maybe a /dev blog post that can be done at intervals. I feel like I've seen this suggestion before somewhere. This would operate similarly to federal crime stats without giving **extreme vigilantes** their bragging rights.
: -using discord in general yes have fun giving them all your information
> [{quoted}](name=colonel cranc,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=TU2roEVn,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-08-13T04:57:18.410+0000) > > -using discord in general > yes have fun giving them all your information Colonal Cranc, I've edited a portion of your comment which was interpreted as a violation of our rules on hate speech/religion. If you have any questions regarding this action please reach out to us on the [Moderation Discord](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/7rtKBZLi-boards-moderation-discord-verification) or our [Discuss the Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation) sub-forum. -Articus43
Show more

Articus43

Level 109 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion