: so i was just perma banned
Sorry about your account. Outcome doesn't look good but you are allowed to appeal with a ticket to riot support.
GreenKnight (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=HmU5LHZE,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-02-18T11:17:27.238+0000) > > I liked Square Enixs approach. They put in a timer that said something like "You've been playing for 2 hours. We suggest taking a break." And everyone ignored that. I know i did X)
> [{quoted}](name=GreenKnight,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=HmU5LHZE,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-02-18T11:33:30.400+0000) > > And everyone ignored that. I know i did X) Some times I did. Some times I didn't. Even the times I did ignore it, I was never annoyed by it. I look at it like a small quality of life feature.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=lHGE4Xmn,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-02-18T05:17:07.255+0000) > > No, she said he was banned for trolling his team by stealing the Jungler's pick intent, switching to _Ghost+Cleanse_, and telling his team to dance mid. > > And you forget to mention that Riot previously had to issue a manual 14-day ban for his consistent trolling. >No, she said he was banned for trolling his team by stealing the Jungler's pick intent, switching to Ghost+Cleanse, and telling his team to dance mid. AGUH?? So picking someone elses intended pick, which is not something that is punishable, using ghost and cleanse, which isn't punishable, and, after their team mates are saying they are going to afk and report him, he says something positive/funny like "dance mid" to say in light moods, and when the game actually starts, he farms to 79 farm in 8:12, which is something akin to perfect farm, thus showing that he is legitimately playing the game to put in that effort, while 3 of his teammates are afk, while his JG is a soraka without smite, amounts to him trolling? Picking someone elses pick because they want it, using a combination of summoners not everyone uses, staying positive and upbeat and not flaming trolling/afking teammates, focusing on playing even though the loss is obvious, all amounts to him trolling and being suspended for 14 days? No, this is a terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible call. Terrible. TERRIBLE. {{sticker:slayer-jinx-unamused}}
> [{quoted}](name=ı Sona ı,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=lHGE4Xmn,comment-id=000300000001,timestamp=2019-02-18T07:04:49.814+0000) > > AGUH?? So picking someone elses intended pick, which is not something that is punishable, using ghost and cleanse, which isn't punishable, and, after their team mates are saying they are going to afk and report him, he says something positive/funny like "dance mid" to say in light moods, and when the game actually starts, he farms to 79 farm in 8:12, which is something akin to perfect farm, thus showing that he is legitimately playing the game to put in that effort, while 3 of his teammates are afk, while his JG is a soraka without smite, amounts to him trolling? > > Picking someone elses pick because they want it, using a combination of summoners not everyone uses, staying positive and upbeat and not flaming trolling/afking teammates, focusing on playing even though the loss is obvious, all amounts to him trolling and being suspended for 14 days? > > No, this is a terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible call. Terrible. TERRIBLE. > > {{sticker:slayer-jinx-unamused}} Cheers. That poor person must be going through so much shit. I wish I could give them a cupcake.
Lusosou (NA)
: Game accountability / Parental control. A different type of player behavior than you may think
I liked Square Enixs approach. They put in a timer that said something like "You've been playing for 2 hours. We suggest taking a break."
: Why No one wants to play Support.
Support is what you make it. I think people are too afraid to experiment because they are getting threatened all the time regardless if they follow meta.
: >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.
> [{quoted}](name=Articus43,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=2XuK6kpY,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-02-17T18:38:53.175+0000) > > 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. That's more helpful than "some exceptions may be appropriate". Thank you for the wisdom.
: Hello, **awf meta**. This will be the one time I extend a friendly warning. We are aware of the account this is an alternate account of, and we are aware of the recurring habit of posting passive-aggressive or "informational" threads against moderation that is continuing on this account. Suffice to say, you have been warned multiple times and have an account permanently banned for this behavior and other similar behavior. If you have a concern, you can raise it without comments like "looking forward to the moderators telling me I'm wrong." If you have a question, you can raise it directly without swipes such as "are moderators forum moderators or PEOPLE moderators?" with no further explanation of your meaning or the intent of such a question. We're not above reasonable discussion, as my conversation with you on Discord should indicate. If, however, you continue to push us in this manner, you will find we become less and less understanding and less inclined to give you the leeway we have been.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=2XuK6kpY,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-02-17T19:56:43.622+0000) > > Hello, **awf meta**. > > This will be the one time I extend a friendly warning. > > We are aware of the account this is an alternate account of, and we are aware of the recurring habit of posting passive-aggressive or "informational" threads against moderation that is continuing on this account. Suffice to say, you have been warned multiple times and have an account permanently banned for this behavior and other similar behavior. If you have a concern, you can raise it without comments like "looking forward to the moderators telling me I'm wrong." If you have a question, you can raise it directly without swipes such as "are moderators forum moderators or PEOPLE moderators?" with no further explanation of your meaning or the intent of such a question. > > We're not above reasonable discussion, as my conversation with you on Discord should indicate. If, however, you continue to push us in this manner, you will find we become less and less understanding and less inclined to give you the leeway we have been. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harass (1) : to annoy persistently was harassing his younger brother (2) : to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct was being harassed by her classmates claims that the police were unfairly harassing him 2 : to worry and impede by repeated raids
rujitra (NA)
: Picks/Hovers/Bans
Bans -> Hovers -> Picks Only concern I have is spaghetti code and LCS. It's illogical to hover before ban. You can't make a team composition until you know the available champion pool. You don't know the available champion pool until after bans. Curve ball: Pick and ban are done at the same time. So first pick gets first ban as well. Then alternates teams after each pick/ban. Screw ball: No bans. Duplicate picks allowed.
Rioter Comments
: About Leaver Busters
I've seen people with very nice computers get bug splats while playing league. Riot should be identifying and remedying the situation. Riot should not be flagging their accounts with leaverbuster.
: Where is that?
> [{quoted}](name=EliUndead,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=3MFETEm4,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-02-15T16:56:49.733+0000) > > Where is that? U.S.A.? Land of the free home of the brave? It's the national anthem.
Rioter Comments
IainG10 (EUW)
: Can We PLEASE Deal With Smurfing in Ranked Now!
Multiple Riot teams would need to work together on this issue. Smurfs can't be stopped from making new accounts. I think the best solution would come from adjusting the MMR algorithm.
: Please calm down, it's just a game.
Oh the look on your face when this thread back fires on you. Angry people aren't the problem. Malicious people make angry people. Kick out the angry people and you are left with malicious people.
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=00070001000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-13T23:21:45.171+0000) > > Show me the $$$. Here ya go, $$$
> [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=000700010000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-13T23:34:08.599+0000) > > Here ya go, $$$ Well played. GG no re.
: Ah yes, the ol' "BUT DERES A MUTE BUTTTON WTFFFFF" comment. I absolutely will mute the two assholes pissing on each other. That doesn't negate the fact that they're being assholes and impacting the game for a bunch of people. Do you have any more tired and contrived arguments, or was "Riot must not have the technology" the upper limits of your ability to be witty?
> [{quoted}](name=GatekeeperTDS,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=uyveP8qP,comment-id=000400010000,timestamp=2019-02-13T23:39:41.682+0000) > > Ah yes, the ol' "BUT DERES A MUTE BUTTTON WTFFFFF" comment. I was much more clever. > I absolutely will mute **the two assholes** **pissing on each other**. Be careful not to turn toxic while pursuing justice. > That doesn't negate the fact that they're being assholes and impacting the game for a bunch of people. Hardly a fact. I have a real fact for you: everyone impacts the game. > Do you have any more tired and contrived arguments, or was "Riot must not have the technology" the upper limits of your ability to be witty? I wasn't really looking to argue. Shit happens I guess. Mute button is OP! Good luck summoner!
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: I don't see how that's relevant. The bottom line is that contrary to what you are implying nobody is punished for who they **are**. What they **do** on Riot's own private servers is punished, especially if it harms their business.
> [{quoted}](name=TrulyBland,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=0007000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-13T23:26:19.511+0000) > > I don't see how that's relevant. > The bottom line is that contrary to what you are implying nobody is punished for who they **are**. What they **do** on Riot's own private servers is punished, especially if it harms their business. That's alright. You can have your opinion and I can have mine. Thanks for sharing.
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=000700010000000000010000,timestamp=2019-02-13T23:12:16.600+0000) > > I would consider coexistence to be a better interest. And how, precisely, would you get trolls and people who harass others to coexist with players that just want to enjoy playing the game? The people who harass others can't even coexist with themselves most of the time. They just get progressively more pissed with each other. And a troll is only a troll because they are intentionally upsetting people. They can't coexist with anyone in teamwork orientated goals.
> [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=0007000100000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-13T23:17:21.203+0000) > > And how, precisely, would you get trolls and people who harass others to coexist with players that just want to enjoy playing the game? Show me the $$$.
: Teamwork and toxicity
You probably want voice chat. It's a lot easier on the listener and the speaker.
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: It's not that only certain people are allowed to play. Everybody can play. The most humongous asshole can play this game. A racist homophobe can play this game, if they want to. Even somebody who enjoys trolling people and ruin their game experience can play this game. What **all** players are expected to do **while** they are playing the game, is to stick to certain behaviour guidelines that ensure that customers are not pissing each other off intentionally.
> [{quoted}](name=TrulyBland,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=00070001000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-13T22:57:45.529+0000) > > > What **all** players are expected to do **while** they are playing the game, is to stick to certain behaviour guidelines that ensure that customers are not pissing each other off intentionally. Sounds like a dream to me. It's going to take a lot more than a video game to get humans to behave like that.
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=0007000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-13T22:54:27.374+0000) > > Because the goal of a video game is that only "certain" people are allowed to play? If I was a video game developer, I would sell my game to anyone that wanted to play. If Riot's goal is to get as many people to enjoy their time in the game as possible encouraging the players, who are pushing out others due to their behavior, to leave is in their best interest. If you allow trolls and jerks push out a majority of the player base, they'll leave soon after as well because the game will have only a fraction of what it once was.
> [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=00070001000000000001,timestamp=2019-02-13T22:58:28.015+0000) > > If Riot's goal is to get as many people to enjoy their time in the game as possible encouraging the players, who are pushing out others due to their behavior, to leave is in their best interest. I would consider coexistence to be a better interest.
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=00070001,timestamp=2019-02-13T22:31:23.132+0000) > > For the same reason Riot doesn't want to use infinite chat restrictions. Except, with permanent bans the offender creates a new account and has no chat restrictions. The offender can indefinitely verbally abuse new players. By that logic, Riot shouldn't be banning for anything. Be it trolling or for poor chat behavior. Since they can just create another account and do it over again. Losing all your progress in a game that has such extremely long-term time sinks such as league is a very big encouragement to not boot the game up again and start from square one. If you care about your progress in League this is Riot's best method to get you to move on. But if you don't care about any of that there is literally nothing realistic Riot can do to keep you from playing. The existence of these people doesn't mean that Riot should just stop trying.
> [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=000700010000,timestamp=2019-02-13T22:39:10.463+0000) > > But if you don't care about any of that there is literally nothing realistic Riot can do to keep you from playing. The existence of these people doesn't mean that Riot should just stop trying. Because the goal of a video game is that only "certain" people are allowed to play? If I was a video game developer, I would sell my game to anyone that wanted to play.
: The game contains more factors than "you" and "person pissing you off." It contains up to 8 more people who just want to play the game and not hear a pissing contest between two people that can't shut up.
> [{quoted}](name=GatekeeperTDS,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=uyveP8qP,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-02-13T18:49:00.904+0000) > > The game contains more factors than "you" and "person pissing you off." > > It contains up to 8 more people who just want to play the game and not hear a pissing contest between two people that can't shut up. If only there was a button to hide all that pissing contest. Riot must not have the technology.
: It's not like the automated system that scans for chat is somehow overburdened by that and can't spend any time detecting game related methods of poor behavior. If you completely stopped the automated system from banning people for poor chat behavior, the trolls would not get banned any faster. Detecting a troll with an automatic system is spotty at best and detecting them with a manual review is slow and time-consuming. In both cases Riot tends to ere on the side of caution because of the desire to never ban someone for just playing poorly with no ill-intent. So if the options are whether or not to ban for poor chat behavior, with little to no effect on how frequently or consistent Riot detects trolling behavior, why shouldn't Riot be banning for poor chat behavior since that too creates a horrible game experience?
> [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l4Oew8iV,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2019-02-13T22:07:26.369+0000) > >why shouldn't Riot be banning for poor chat behavior since that too creates a horrible game experience? For the same reason Riot doesn't want to use infinite chat restrictions. Except, with permanent bans the offender creates a new account and has no chat restrictions. The offender can indefinitely verbally abuse new players.
: riot creating a more toxic environment
Riot has been slow to action and slow to learn. Opinion. For example, Riot did some experimentation with infinite chat restrictions. Riot claims that lead to more game play offenses. Well, a permanent ban is a more severe infinite chat restriction. Toxic people are going to create new accounts and commit game play offenses instead of chat offenses. Except now, the system just thinks they are a "new player" that is just having "bad games". The system will even return their honor rewards faster than if they were allowed to reform on their banned account. It's all the bad things of infinite chat restriction with even more bad added on.
Kei143 (NA)
: 20 days (or 100 games) later, I've hit H3
It took just under 48 hours play time to reach 1 checkpoint? I think if play time was the main factor, some people would be getting honor 3 in less than a week. (Does that happen?) My guess would be honor system is kind of like a daily quest system. You get credit for 1 game per day.
: Healthy alternatives to flaming
> [{quoted}](name=Tuition Fee,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=z45vIiE9,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-02-13T05:49:14.748+0000) > > 1. Abbreviate! For example, "Your mom is a %%%%" can be shortened to YMIAC. No one knows what it means other than you! Already happened with kys. Abbreviation has to keep changing or Riot will just add it to the chat filter.
: Food for thought.
Well, one problem is the transparency. Some people legitimately don't know how the behavior systems in league work. I would suggest a F.A.Q. That way Riot doesn't have to define every little nuance, just the most frequent situations. That is to say with all this supposed machine learning it would be very easy to keep an updated list of the most common community issues. I agree with you about writing notes into the report. If I were Riot, I would only investigate reports that had a note and never tell the public.
: Being ignored by support team after an unjust ban.
Welcome to the club! {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}} Unfortunately, if Riot wants to ignore you, they are allowed.
Awf Meta (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=theChibiTina,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000300000001000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T20:25:23.862+0000) > > But if you are giving me the context to the word then that world already has a meaning regardless of if I change the meaning in my own personal little world. Yes. I'm not enforcing the meaning though. >If I try to use it for whatever meaning I give it, everyone else will look down upon it because it already has a meaning. Not always true. I'm not an expert at culture modification. However, some words have clearly changed meaning over even a single human life span. > Edit: btw I noticed someone is downvoting your comments and I want you to know that it's not me. I have no reason to downvote when we're having active communication. I appreciate that. I've grown pretty indifferent to votes myself. It's still nice to know that some people are civil with their vote.
> [{quoted}](name=theChibiTina,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=00050000000000030000000100000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T21:12:41.519+0000) > >It takes the effort of many people to change the meaning of a word and not many people are that keen on change since they knew it to mean one thing for their whole life. Well the interesting part about that in my opinion: the human species is getting to the point where public racism is no longer common. For the first time, it's possible to actually be ignorant of racism. Only 54 years ago, USA was segregated by race. EDIT: I want to make an addendum. Racism is not gone. It is only less obvious. Changing the meaning of a word will not eliminate hate. That is why I find the intentions much more important than the words.
Awf Meta (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Sobx,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000300000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:49:16.202+0000) > > You didn't "demand" it? Nope. It was simply my opinion. You don't have to follow it if you don't want. My opinion is certainly capable of being wrong.
> [{quoted}](name=Sobx,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=00050000000000030000000000000000000000000000000000000002,timestamp=2019-02-12T20:27:23.542+0000) > > 1. "ok, so I'm unable to dispute what you're saying" > 2. "... I'm **probably** wrong one here" > > You're not "probably" wrong here. You are wrong. Ok. Thanks for proving me wrong.
: But if you are giving me the context to the word then that world already has a meaning regardless of if I change the meaning in my own personal little world. If I try to use it for whatever meaning I give it, everyone else will look down upon it because it already has a meaning. Even if I explain my meaning for the word they will look at me and tell me that's not what the word means and that I am wrong. words are given accepted meaning so that we may communicate effectively. I can't say vhs and mean dvd because people will think I mean vhs. I can't say bowl and mean plate. I can't say fork and mean spoon. If every person has their own unique meanings for the same words then we won't know exactly what any other person is trying to say and communication effectively breaks down all together. Edit: btw I noticed someone is downvoting your comments and I want you to know that it's not me. I have no reason to downvote when we're having active communication.
> [{quoted}](name=theChibiTina,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000300000001000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T20:25:23.862+0000) > > But if you are giving me the context to the word then that world already has a meaning regardless of if I change the meaning in my own personal little world. Yes. I'm not enforcing the meaning though. >If I try to use it for whatever meaning I give it, everyone else will look down upon it because it already has a meaning. Not always true. I'm not an expert at culture modification. However, some words have clearly changed meaning over even a single human life span. > Edit: btw I noticed someone is downvoting your comments and I want you to know that it's not me. I have no reason to downvote when we're having active communication. I appreciate that. I've grown pretty indifferent to votes myself. It's still nice to know that some people are civil with their vote.
Desypher (NA)
: AFK's and LeaverBuster in relation to Ranked
The common defense I've seen is sample size argument. Over an infinite amounts of games, the AFK would not have a meaningful impact on your rank. The problem is, some people don't play an infinite amount of games. The less games you play, the more your rank is influenced by AFK.
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=0xoP7VEd,comment-id=0000000100000000000000000001,timestamp=2019-02-12T18:49:42.911+0000) > > How did Riot determine that a vast majority of those players never came back to the game? Not sure. I corrected the OP's assumption of the player count based on an incorrect percentage they were using. Not only were they using a number that wasn't what the message gives, they were incorrectly applying a percentage to come out to a result that was vastly greater than the correct one.
> [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=0xoP7VEd,comment-id=00000001000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2019-02-12T20:02:32.599+0000) > > Not sure. I corrected the OP's assumption of the player count based on an incorrect percentage they were using. Not only were they using a number that wasn't what the message gives, they were incorrectly applying a percentage to come out to a result that was vastly greater than the correct one. Sorry I was just curious and you seemed knowledgeable. I don't mean to interrupt. Thank you for your help.
: A group of random people is still more than one single person making it the way it is though. It is the way it is because many people mutually accept it to be that way. Also, giving me a warning means you are telling me it is wrong and not to do it again which still means it is bad.
> [{quoted}](name=theChibiTina,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=0005000000000003000000010000000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:59:40.216+0000) > > A group of random people is still more than one single person making it the way it is though. Democracy is only one way of life. >It is the way it is because many people mutually accept it to be that way. Doesn't mean it can't/shouldn't be changed. > Also, giving me a warning means you are telling me it is wrong and not to do it again which still means it is bad. That's not the warning I would have given. I would have explained the context of the word. Then, allow you to form your own opinion.
Awf Meta (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Sobx,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000300000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:49:16.202+0000) > > You didn't "demand" it? Nope. It was simply my opinion. You don't have to follow it if you don't want. My opinion is certainly capable of being wrong.
> [{quoted}](name=Sobx,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=00050000000000030000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:57:01.943+0000) > > You didn't "demand" it? > "You should be providing reasoning with your inference." > So what did you do, "propose" it? For someone who tries to make a whole point of "words having no inherent meaning" you sure are bent on nitpicking on a single-word semantics. Are you trying to argue your own """"point"""" right now? > > There's no need to "provide reasoning" when his words are 100% clear. If anything, he (or you for that matter) should provide it, because he (and yes, still you) is the one that tries to dispute it. You have nothing to say here, so you demand explanation where one's not needed, but when the tables are turned all you can do is "yhhh lets agree to disagree thanks baaaaai!". > At this point I'm pretty sure you know how wrong you are, but you're just one of those poeple that would rather cover their ears and scream instead of admitting they're incorrect > > > You ""accidentally"" missed a bit here, buddy. I read your post and my opinion doesn't seem to match. That's ok. I wish you well. I'm probably the wrong one here.
Sobx (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=00050000000000030000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:33:16.882+0000) > > I don't think I "demanded". I feel you should provide reasoning with your inference because reason is what differentiates inferences from assumptions. You didn't "demand" it? "**You should be providing reasoning with your inference.**" So what did you do, "propose" it? For someone who tries to make a whole point of "words having no inherent meaning" you sure are bent on nitpicking on a single-word semantics. Are you trying to argue your own """"point"""" right now? There's no need to "provide reasoning" when his words are 100% clear. If anything, he (or you for that matter) should provide it, because he (and yes, still you) is the one that tries to dispute it. You have nothing to say here, so you demand explanation where one's not needed, but when the tables are turned all you can do is "yhhh lets agree to disagree thanks baaaaai!". At this point I'm pretty sure you know how wrong you are, but you're just one of those poeple that would rather cover their ears and scream instead of admitting they're incorrect
> [{quoted}](name=Sobx,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000300000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:49:16.202+0000) > > You didn't "demand" it? Nope. It was simply my opinion. You don't have to follow it if you don't want. My opinion is certainly capable of being wrong.
: Not because a random person said so. Because society says so due to what it was used to represent in the past. Regardless of how you use it, it is culturally accepted to be a racist term. That is why I could be punished for it even though I did not use it in that way.
> [{quoted}](name=theChibiTina,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=00050000000000030000000100000001,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:40:31.195+0000) > > Not because a random person said so. Because society says so Society = group of random people > due to what it was used to represent in the past. That's called perpetuating negativity. At some point, forgiveness will win the war. It's just a matter of time. >Regardless of how you use it, it is culturally accepted to be a racist term. That is why I could be punished for it even though I did not use it in that way. "Could" be punished. Yes. "Should" be punished. I don't think so. I would have warned you before I even thought about punishing you.
Awf Meta (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=TrulyBland,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000000000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-11T21:40:50.715+0000) > I am the only person in existence. I decide what my language means. I communicate it into the void.
> [{quoted}](name=TrulyBland,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=00050000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:38:15.205+0000) > > Now, personally, I wouldn't call that communication. And I also think it's disproportionate to focus on LoL's punishment system when you could use the same argument to reduce literally every aspect of society to absurdity. > > But ultimately: > Your philosophy, your choice. If you want to completely subscribe to solipsism that's fair. What's not fair, however, is bringing it up exclusively to criticise people imposing consequences on you for your actions. > Not the least bit because that, too, is ultimately absurd when you don't assume that anybody can ever actually understand your criticism. Life can be pretty absurd in my opinion. I just try to go with the flow. {{sticker:slayer-jinx-catface}}
Sobx (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=0005000000000003000000010000,timestamp=2019-02-12T17:56:33.409+0000) > > Only because a random person said so. It is hardly a law of nature or culture. What do you exactly mean by that? Are you trying to argue that words don't have meaning? Or your argument is that language is men-made so it shouldn't count as anything and any word you use can mean whatever you want? That is straight up wrong and a terrible excuse for this situation.
> [{quoted}](name=Sobx,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=00050000000000030000000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:10:04.314+0000) > > What do you exactly mean by that? Words have inferred and assumed meanings. Which naturally makes the meaning of any word subjective.
Sobx (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000300000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T17:42:23.474+0000) > > Let's agree to disagree then. Good luck. Peace. Ah, so you demand "providing reasoning" and then back out when it appears you should be giving one, makes sense. Not that it surprises me though.
> [{quoted}](name=Sobx,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=0005000000000003000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T19:02:28.180+0000) > > Ah, so you demand "providing reasoning" and then back out when it appears you should be giving one, makes sense. Not that it surprises me though. I don't think I "demanded". I feel you should provide reasoning with your inference because reason is what differentiates inferences from assumptions.
: *Gets trolled hard all game by inting afk teammates* *Gets annoyed* * Gets Chat Restricted* KAY
I want personal surrender. I would only use it in extreme cases because I do like winning.
: > [{quoted}](name=Vulnerablegurl,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=0xoP7VEd,comment-id=00000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T07:21:50.718+0000) > > riots data is to big to even be considered theres around 67 million players who play league and then the box says 0.06 only get banned well yeah that may be true but thats like 400k players right there you have to look at the bigger picture this is a toxic game and theres nothing riot can do to fix it there are tons of youtube videos about how toxic league is or "Top 10 most toxic online games" league is always high up and theres nothing riot can do The message says **0.006%**. Out of 67 million players that would come out to 4,020 players.
> [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=0xoP7VEd,comment-id=000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T07:24:48.053+0000) > > The message says **0.006%**. > > Out of 67 million players that would come out to 4,020 players. How did Riot determine that a vast majority of those players never came back to the game?
: FF14 enacting new player behavior as well.
I think newer games are putting in more behavior systems than older games. It's a trend.
: I just came across this on google,
Is this a tinfoil friendly zone? -dips toe into water- Tencent owns botting software -quickly takes toe out of water and looks around-
Terozu (NA)
: The typical response when I explain that the report system is binary is, "We'll report you too."
Because you aren't the authority and the system has changed over time. I'm sure there are some straight up troll responses mixed in as well. Now, if they refuse to acknowledge Riot quotes and links, I can't defend that.
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=EpqOwqo9,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T17:38:40.534+0000)If you read closely, Keyru says they "took over the program". Who was in charge before? Who created the program? The quote is that she "looks" over the program, as per what you posted. The words "took over" do not appear. Moderation used to be done by a group from ModSquad, and is now done by a volunteer team vetted by Riot Keyru. She has been the main Riot contact for the volunteer program since it started. We also use Discord as a primary point of contact because Keyru personally handling every concern is not necessary nor a productive use of her time, since most are simple resolutions or people who insist that we overturn very obviously correct punishments. If people are unsatisfied with the answers they receive they can feel free to reach out to her, but her engagement on any given concern is at her own discretion and the volunteer team has no direct control over it. This isn't a big secret or discovery -- it's something I've personally mentioned before in multiple places. :)
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=EpqOwqo9,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T17:45:12.567+0000) > > The quote is that she "looks" over the program, as per what you posted. The words "took over" do not appear. Moderation used to be done by a group from ModSquad, and is now done by a volunteer team vetted by Riot Keyru. She has been the main Riot contact for the volunteer program since it started. > > We also use Discord as a primary point of contact because Keyru personally handling every concern is not necessary nor a productive use of her time, since most are simple resolutions or people who insist that we overturn very obviously correct punishments. If people are unsatisfied with the answers they receive they can feel free to reach out to her, but her engagement on any given concern is at her own discretion and the volunteer team has no direct control over it. > > This isn't a big secret or discovery -- it's something I've personally mentioned before in multiple places. :) Oops I better edit. Don't ever get old. It's not worth. AND thank you for pointing that out.
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: I've never restricted myself to words. Nodding your head is a cultural thing easily misunderstood in certain cultures. Even in fairly similar cultures the gesture for "two" and "go fuck yourself" can be virtually identical. If you go beyond species you get to the point where even the very basic concept of **pointing** at things isn't universally understood in all species even if they have appendages technically suitable for pointing. The bottom line is this: You cannot infer meaning from an attempt to communicate without relying on convention, which is to say: the assumption that the other person sticks to convention as well. And I'm not basing this on linguistics or social sciences, either. I'm talking about the cold hard undeniable proven universal mathematical facts of information theory: Without something to base your interpretation on, you cannot distinguish information from noise. And from this follows the most crucial part of what I'm saying, and something that you have misunderstood in an equally crucial manner: At that point there is not interpretation of any sort. Not even misinterpretation, because there is nowhere you could even start your interpretation. As such there is no miscommunication, there is no communication, there is only - as I've previously called it - screaming into the void. Edit: I hope that you will still read this, let's make it simple: Define one word. Just one word, of your own choosing. You can pretend you have everything at your disposal that you may want to use to convey meaning, and you can pretend we're in the same room and I can see you, so feel free to explain what you are doing, if you have the feeling words won't do the trick. And I will explain to you which assumptions you are making, which preconditions must be met for me to be able to understand what you are trying to convey.
> [{quoted}](name=TrulyBland,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000000000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-11T21:40:50.715+0000) > I am the only person in existence. I decide what my language means. I communicate it into the void.
: Um . . . no. When I was little I called a white kid the n-word because I didn't know what it actually meant. I had absolutely no intention of using it in reference to race. I only knew of the word because it was in an episode of South Park. I still got in trouble because even though I had no intention of it being racist, it is still a racist term. So that means a word can still be considered racist regardless of the intent behind the word.
> [{quoted}](name=theChibiTina,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=000500000000000300000001,timestamp=2019-02-12T06:58:35.422+0000) > >I still got in trouble because even though I had no intention of it being racist, it is still a racist term. So that means a word can still be considered racist regardless of the intent behind the word. Only because a random person said so. It is hardly a law of nature or culture.
Sobx (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Awf Meta,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=0005000000000003000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T05:22:20.666+0000) > > That seems a little unnecessarily harsh in my opinion. > > You are dismissing evidence before you even see it. Reality of the situation is that we will never know for certain what the OP intended. You should be providing reasoning with your inference. What? You're the one that claims that "context would change something here" (even if you're not the person I initially answered to) when the intent of OP's words is as clear as it could be. There's no need to "provide" anything here. That also is in no way "harsh".
> [{quoted}](name=Sobx,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XyruXXEm,comment-id=00050000000000030000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T12:40:30.936+0000) > > What? You're the one that claims that "context would change something here" (even if you're not the person I initially answered to) when the intent of OP's words is as clear as it could be. There's no need to "provide" anything here. > > That also is in no way "harsh". Let's agree to disagree then. Good luck. Peace.
Show more

Awf Meta

Level 46 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion