: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LpAXfAi8,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-03-26T03:27:57.102+0000) > > I pledge my loyalty to no one. Didn't you have a fling with Busty Demoness???
> [{quoted}](name=ChickenWrap,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LpAXfAi8,comment-id=000400000000,timestamp=2019-03-26T03:34:08.524+0000) > > Didn't you have a fling with Busty Demoness??? I just needed help on a job. The fact it was on a deserted island was just a coincidence.
: Why not go after Busty Kunoichi instead? I hear they're in the market!
> [{quoted}](name=ChickenWrap,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LpAXfAi8,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-03-26T03:25:46.661+0000) > > Why not go after Busty Kunoichi instead? I hear they're in the market! I pledge my loyalty to no one.
: About Taurus Demon in Dark Souls
Nope. But it's not like it's a hard fight when you're between his legs and avoiding 90% of his hits because his hit boxes aren't good.
: ITT: Describe your recent League experiences with a Pokemon move
Rest. Because I feel like every couple games of League leaves me too tired to play anything else for a while.
: If they were going to release those skins what they should have done is make them event exclusive as a reward. TBH the Morg and Kayle rework should have been this years VS event. There was so much more potential there then the vs event we got here. If I was to pick a skin I want brought back, it would def be silver kayle, BUT it was exclusive as they have stressed. Although they did say the same for championship riven and Pax Sivir. Both of which were brought back with some form of variation to them. I have hopes for Silver Kayle possibly, but I can't say I expect anything. Judgement I feel should have just always been available. It was given out to everyone back then who played ranked. Idk why they couldn't just give that one out again for this "event"
> [{quoted}](name=Can NOT Support,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fdwtEhiA,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-03-07T00:32:14.844+0000) > > If they were going to release those skins what they should have done is make them event exclusive as a reward. TBH the Morg and Kayle rework should have been this years VS event. There was so much more potential there then the vs event we got here. > > If I was to pick a skin I want brought back, it would def be silver kayle, BUT it was exclusive as they have stressed. Although they did say the same for championship riven and Pax Sivir. Both of which were brought back with some form of variation to them. I have hopes for Silver Kayle possibly, but I can't say I expect anything. > > Judgement I feel should have just always been available. It was given out to everyone back then who played ranked. Idk why they couldn't just give that one out again for this "event" Silver was fine to be released again. Judgment... If they do that then they're gonna need to release all victorious skins again (not just Morgana). Judgment Kayle was effectively a Victorious skin, so to release that again sets a new precedent for such skins. I still agree that they should have done a regular VS event with these two though. It was absolutely perfect given their inherent nature.
: Sisters of justice icon
I didn't see any mission for it, nor the icon in the shop.
Quáx (NA)
: Most Hated Champion?
Normally I'd list Yasuo because fuck Windwall. I'd have to go with Zed because "muh popular high skill champ" can still piggyback off Duskblade and Youmuu's to burst down a squishy while missing both Shuriken and Slash.
: Riot should disable new/reworked champions in ranked for the first week
Riot doesn't want to do it because "it denies them play data". Sadly, they use that data to buff champions BECAUSE they're new and players aren't experienced in dealing with them (mostly playing as but also against).
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OvWvY24k,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-03-06T22:44:51.895+0000) > > So rather than post even semi-concrete evidence that they'll be included, you just post some rhetoric? > > Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see them in the skin line but there's no guarantee. I think its more just a "This is my prediction" statement.
> [{quoted}](name=AbiwonKenabi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OvWvY24k,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-03-06T22:48:16.892+0000) > > I think its more just a "This is my prediction" statement. I'm saying he's still lacking any sort of evidence beyond "they just got their visual updates", which is still far from a guarantee they'll get SG skins.
: #YouHeardItHereFirst: The next Star Guardian wave will include Kayle and Morgana
So rather than post even semi-concrete evidence that they'll be included, you just post some rhetoric? Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see them in the skin line but there's no guarantee.
DeusVult (NA)
: Thematic changes that would break a champion
Male champions are immune to being knocked up.
: What do you do when someone questions your item build?
Personally? I mention that it's not the reason we're losing the game because it's often called out by someone who fed their butt off.
: "Stfu dude, you got carried"
I mean, if you're talking shit after being carried that is a legitimate response. Bragging about someone else doing the work for you is basically being toxic for the sake of being toxic, which is worse than simply being a sore winner (which is bragging after you personally carried).
: Excuse me, it's 40% dolomite.
He's also 40% Mexican from being built in Mexico with Mexican parts.
wolvius (EUW)
: https://i.imgflip.com/2v9qgu.jpg GL HF
: as if kitty kat katarina doesnt exist
> [{quoted}](name=FOR JUSTICE,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=9WIIVakR,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-03-05T17:44:48.612+0000) > > as if kitty kat katarina doesnt exist Kitty Cat Katarina is a Halloween skin, though. And doesn't have much to do with cats other than making Kat look like one.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=9WIIVakR,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-03-05T17:36:12.833+0000) > > Which champions got skins? Fizz, Rengar, Yorick, and Corki.
> [{quoted}](name=DNGSkitty RAWR,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=9WIIVakR,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-03-05T17:38:24.538+0000) > > Fizz, Rengar, Yorick, and Corki. Okay, I'm just gonna say that Crazy Cat Yorick has been a fan requested skin for YEARS. He deserves this. The other 3 I'm genuinely lost as to how those will be implemented especially since Rengar is already a gigantic cat man.
: Cats vs Dogs skins event only for male champions??? Seriously?
: Wrong. The definition of unanimous does not include votes that _possibly could have opposed but didn't_. https://www.google.com/search?q=unanimously+definition&rlz=1C1CHBD_enUS833US833&oq=Unanimous&aqs=chrome.1.0l6.5720j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
> [{quoted}](name=Metal Janna,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=0001000000010000000200000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-05T05:51:01.459+0000) > > Wrong. The definition of unanimous does not include votes that _possibly could have opposed but didn't_. > https://www.google.com/search?q=unanimously+definition&rlz=1C1CHBD_enUS833US833&oq=Unanimous&aqs=chrome.1.0l6.5720j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 "To the **AGREEMENT** of **ALL PEOPLE INVOLVED**" You don't get to exclude team members just because they didn't vote as they are involved in the decision. And once a-fucking-gain, neutral does not mean "yes" or "no" and therefore does not count as "agreement" in either case. Seriously, just stop.
: Do you report people in-game because you're offended or to get them banned? Both?
Because I find their attitude/behavior unacceptable and want them to change it. I don't particularly care whether or not they get banned as long as their behavior is no longer disruptive.
: Earlier today I got cat-called
I've gotten a cat call just like that from a buddy. Except it was his cat starting a discord video call instead.
: In your opinion, what are the unhealthiest champs, mechanics, strategies in the game?
Yasuo: Least Healthy champ by Kit (gated by user skill) Riven: Least Healthy mechanics (gated by animation cancels) Zero CS: Least Healthy Strategy (gotta love how Riot keeps creating things that eventually bite them in the ass)
: Ok, seriously, can we please remove auto fill for god damn normals?
Make it an option for players going in alone (as in any players in a party cannot use this) and warn players who use the option that they should expect longer queue times.
: Two answers to that technically. The one he's looking for is Yasuo...but Riven must also be an acceptable answer.
> [{quoted}](name=ChaosReyn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=XoOAcRkj,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-03-05T02:01:40.850+0000) > > Two answers to that technically. The one he's looking for is Yasuo...but Riven must also be an acceptable answer. Riven doesn't ever build Statik Shiv though.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=0001000000010000000200000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T13:45:00.101+0000) > > Just because it's not treated as "yes" does not equate to being treated as "no". It just means there is not enough consensus to change the game state from its current default. It IS treated as a "no". Call a surrender vote at 20 minutes and 3 people vote yes, 1 person votes no, and 1 person doesn't vote. The vote doesn't pass exactly as it would had the undecided voted "no". Same with an early surrender vote that goes 4-0. It's still treated as not unanimous despite every single vote being for "yes". The current system treats a non-vote as a vote for "no". > Besides, if we went with this system people would start crying for 3-2 votes (as in 3 yes and 2 no, 0 undecided) to pass for normal surrender. I don't want to change a system towards encouraging players to give up. As I said in my original reply, this isn't Fortnite and requires a different level of commitment. If you aren't willing to make that commitment, don't ever queue up. Those people already exist. Changing the vote system to only count votes actually cast would not effect the level of support for that proposal. That is a slippery slope fallacy. I'm against lowering the threshold for a surrender too, but changing the system to **only count votes actually cast** has nothing to do with that. Simply set the threshold at 66% and it still requires the same number of votes as it currently does in all cases where everyone actually voted.
> [{quoted}](name=Metal Janna,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=00010000000100000002000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T22:13:37.709+0000) > > It IS treated as a "no". Call a surrender vote at 20 minutes and 3 people vote yes, 1 person votes no, and 1 person doesn't vote. The vote doesn't pass exactly as it would had the undecided voted "no". > Same with an early surrender vote that goes 4-0. It's still treated as not unanimous despite every single vote being for "yes". > The current system treats a non-vote as a vote for "no". > > Those people already exist. Changing the vote system to only count votes actually cast would not effect the level of support for that proposal. That is a slippery slope fallacy. > > I'm against lowering the threshold for a surrender too, but changing the system to **only count votes actually cast** has nothing to do with that. Simply set the threshold at 66% and it still requires the same number of votes as it currently does in all cases where everyone actually voted. Except you DO change the vote threshold required by flat number of votes, rather than percentage. A surrender should NEVER be considered as passed just because 2 or 3 players out of 5 voted yes. And a single undecided vote means an otherwise 4-0 vote IS NOT UNANIMOUS. Unanimous means EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE VOTE WAS THE SAME OUTCOME. When you have a poll, do you consider "undecided" responses as "yes, I like it" or "no, I dislike it"? Because your current translation is that undecided votes have to be made one way or another. That's not how "undecided" or "neutral" works. The short version is that it accounts all possible votes for a reason. Changing it to only account for those who voted implies that the desires of 1-3 players should dictate the voices of 5 (based on total undecided votes). That's not logical by any means.
Moody P (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EnQZsNNj,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T18:23:14.194+0000) > > CertainlyT is known for overloaded designs and cancerous mechanics. His only good rework on record is Warwick and even that has issues with being deceptively tanky. > > It was about the designer you requested rather than the fact you asked for a rework. Name me a better dev
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EnQZsNNj,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T18:25:08.468+0000) > > Name me a better dev Riot Jag, who designed Kai'Sa and Camille; and reworked Aatrox, Lucian and Teemo. Kai'Sa had a very straightforward kit. The ability to use those abilities together and well was also relatively straightforward but wasn't over tuned until Riot buffed her. Camille was over tuned, but not inherently toxic design. Lucian is hit or miss. Sometimes the meta works great for him and sometimes it doesn't. Teemo, while annoying, isn't ever truly strong. Aatrox wasn't any worse than Akali in many ways. He also never needed to completely ignore normal mechanics like towers granting sight.
Salron (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Irelia Bot,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EnQZsNNj,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2019-03-04T18:04:44.504+0000) > > Aka perma banned. Literally none of his champs are remotely near permaban except Yasuo
> [{quoted}](name=Aarron,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EnQZsNNj,comment-id=00090000,timestamp=2019-03-04T18:09:57.307+0000) > > Literally none of his champs are remotely near permaban except Yasuo Akali was permaban until they nerfed her out of being viable and is only now being buffed after losing her true stealth under turret. Darius hasn't ever been weak. Warwick still has problems with being deceptively tanky. So yeah, I'd say his designs need to be kept out of League partially due to how League was originally designed and because his designs are generally bad for PVP settings unless everything is to his design.
Moody P (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EnQZsNNj,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-03-04T17:46:22.212+0000) > > So you want Volibear reworked to include an exceptionally cancerous mechanic that will result in an extremely high ban rate that will go for months before Riot finally brings it remotely in line? You people keep telling me Volibear is a toxic stat check. I ask for a humble rework and now he will be overloaded and cancerous. I just can't win with you, you're not being reasonable.
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EnQZsNNj,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T18:06:57.863+0000) > > You people keep telling me Volibear is a toxic stat check. > > > I ask for a humble rework and now he will be overloaded and cancerous. > > I just can't win with you, you're not being reasonable. CertainlyT is known for overloaded designs and cancerous mechanics. His only good rework on record is Warwick and even that has issues with being deceptively tanky. It was about the designer you requested rather than the fact you asked for a rework.
Moody P (NA)
: Every day I pray Certainly T reworks Volibear
So you want Volibear reworked to include an exceptionally cancerous mechanic that will result in an extremely high ban rate that will go for months before Riot finally brings it remotely in line?
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=00010000000100000002000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T02:38:04.254+0000) > > Okay, not everything is "yes or no". > > There is a such position as "neutral". If you truly believe that Neutral should automatically count as yes, then there's no further discussion as it's impossible to change your mindset. When did I ever say "abstain" should count as "yes"? The system you are arguing for automatically counts "abstain" as "no". The system I am arguing for treats "abstain" as "I don't care, let the others decide". Like in every other democratic system.
> [{quoted}](name=Metal Janna,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=000100000001000000020000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T04:04:48.927+0000) > > When did I ever say "abstain" should count as "yes"? > The system you are arguing for automatically counts "abstain" as "no". > The system I am arguing for treats "abstain" as "I don't care, let the others decide". Like in every other democratic system. Just because it's not treated as "yes" does not equate to being treated as "no". It just means there is not enough consensus to change the game state from its current default. Besides, if we went with this system people would start crying for 3-2 votes (as in 3 yes and 2 no, 0 undecided) to pass for normal surrender. I don't want to change a system towards encouraging players to give up. As I said in my original reply, this isn't Fortnite and requires a different level of commitment. If you aren't willing to make that commitment, don't ever queue up.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=000100000001000000020000,timestamp=2019-03-04T01:51:59.001+0000) > > Saying "just vote" puts the burden on those who didn't vote, rather than on the impatience of those who want the vote to be done with. Yes, exactly like voting in any system anywhere. > Additionally, the default state of the game is "continue playing". Admitting defeat should require the consensus of the greater majority of all possible votes partially because of this but also because it's not fair to let a minority say "well these votes don't count because they weren't cast to either side". It is 100% fair to ignore the opinion of someone who doesn't care enough to render it.
> [{quoted}](name=Metal Janna,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=0001000000010000000200000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T02:30:14.872+0000) > > Yes, exactly like voting in any system anywhere. > > It is 100% fair to ignore the opinion of someone who doesn't care enough to render it. Okay, not everything is "yes or no". There is a such position as "neutral". If you truly believe that Neutral should automatically count as yes, then there's no further discussion as it's impossible to change your mindset.
: Is Mecha not the 3rd? or battlecast?
Mecha and Battlecast seem to be an entirely separate war. Mecha and Battlecast, though, certainly have their place for the very monstrous/large characters and serve as an alternative to Project/Program/Virus.
: Literally got into gold after almost 150 games and got demoted 5 games later
Why are you bothering to play games now that you've hit Gold? The rewards at Gold+ are all variants of the same set.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=0001000000010000,timestamp=2019-03-04T00:00:36.546+0000) > If 2 people vote yes and 1 votes no with 2 undecided, the proposed system would make the 2 yes votes into 4. If two people said yes, and one person said no, then that's a 66% yes vote, which should pass. > This means a MINORITY has made the decision when 2 of the votes either couldn't decide or didn't get around to it. A MINORITY of the total population and a MAJORITY of those who voted. If those two undecided didn't want the outcome being decided by the other two, _then they should have voted_. My proposal would only cause votes to be decided by the majority of voters, disregarding the opinions of those who can't decide/are AFK. _The same way every democratic system works anywhere._ > What's being described here is not a dictation of actions, but a dictation of voice. My vote should not be cast for me under any circumstances. I said it should COUNT as though the undecided voted with the majority. So that the **majority of votes cast** is what decides the outcome, not the **majority of votes possible**. This is a coding fix, not a changing of votes. No one is deciding your vote for you, you're voting to let the majority decide when you choose not to vote.
> [{quoted}](name=Metal Janna,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=00010000000100000002,timestamp=2019-03-04T01:18:08.353+0000) > > If two people said yes, and one person said no, then that's a 66% yes vote, which should pass. > > A MINORITY of the total population and a MAJORITY of those who voted. If those two undecided didn't want the outcome being decided by the other two, _then they should have voted_. > My proposal would only cause votes to be decided by the majority of voters, disregarding the opinions of those who can't decide/are AFK. _The same way every democratic system works anywhere._ > > I said it should COUNT as though the undecided voted with the majority. So that the **majority of votes cast** is what decides the outcome, not the **majority of votes possible**. This is a coding fix, not a changing of votes. No one is deciding your vote for you, you're voting to let the majority decide when you choose not to vote. Saying "just vote" puts the burden on those who didn't vote, rather than on the impatience of those who want the vote to be done with. Additionally, the default state of the game is "continue playing". Admitting defeat should require the consensus of the greater majority of all possible votes partially because of this but also because it's not fair to let a minority say "well these votes don't count because they weren't cast to either side". Being undecided should not count as either a yes or no vote. But it should not be discarded simply because it didn't go to either side.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=000100000001000000010000,timestamp=2019-03-04T00:26:48.750+0000) > > The difference is that you're adjusting the game in a binary manner, continue playing or admit defeat (gameE ends). Which you are already doing in the first place by throwing up the surrender vote. > Riot decided that the default state of the game, continuing to play, should only be overridden when 4/5 players agree to outright end the game. Why should undecided votes automatically go against the default state of the game? Because you arent voting, which is how voting in every other means in the world works. Do the people who don’t vote in election get to hold it up until they vote? Do companies freeze for the people who decide not to vote on a subject? If you want your contribution to matter, then vote.
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=0001000000010000000100000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T00:38:16.325+0000) > > Which you are already doing in the first place by throwing up the surrender vote. > > Because you arent voting, which is how voting in every other means in the world works. Do the people who don’t vote in election get to hold it up until they vote? Do companies freeze for the people who decide not to vote on a subject? If you want your contribution to matter, then vote. No, the vote itself is not changing the game state. It's a REQUEST to change the game state. It's not unlike starting a vote to swap the CEO of a company out for someone else. If there aren't enough yes votes for it, it defaults to "he stays" even if there aren't a majority of "no" votes.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=0001000000010000,timestamp=2019-03-04T00:00:36.546+0000) > > If I say "neither yes or no", it should not be changed to "yes" just because 2 or 3 other people (out of 5 total) voted yes. You’re right it shouldn’t auto change for yes, it shouldn’t also auto change to no then on that same logic. > If 2 people vote yes and 1 votes no with 2 undecided, the proposed system would make the 2 yes votes into 4. This means a MINORITY has made the decision when 2 of the votes either couldn't decide or didn't get around to it. Indeed, that is just like voting. If you aren’t willing to go to a polling office and vote for what you want, you can’t complain about the results. Your vote doesn’t auto count against the majority that is voting when you aren’t. > What's being described here is not a dictation of actions, but a dictation of voice. My vote should not be cast for me under any circumstances. Shouldn’t be cast against the people voting either.
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=00010000000100000001,timestamp=2019-03-04T00:12:00.320+0000) > > You’re right it shouldn’t auto change for yes, it shouldn’t also auto change to no then on that same logic. > > Indeed, that is just like voting. If you aren’t willing to go to a polling office and vote for what you want, you can’t complain about the results. Your vote doesn’t auto count against the majority that is voting when you aren’t. The difference is that you're adjusting the game in a binary manner, continue playing or admit defeat (game ends). > Shouldn’t be cast against the people voting either. Riot decided that the default state of the game, continuing to play, should only be overridden when 4/5 players agree to outright end the game. Why should undecided votes automatically go against the default state of the game?
CLG ear (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Quiet Dude,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:58:07.614+0000) > > You can't force people to vote. It's their game time too. It sucks, but it's what you signed up for. Be willing to be there to the end or not at all, or use your alt+F4 summoner spell. that's not the way the world works, and besides it takes literally less than a second to click a button. You already know if u want to keep playing or give up before the vote even comes. Voting is not this daunting task that takes all of your concentration for 10 minutes to decide.
> [{quoted}](name=CLG ear,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-04T00:06:06.474+0000) > > that's not the way the world works, and besides it takes literally less than a second to click a button. You already know if u want to keep playing or give up before the vote even comes. Voting is not this daunting task that takes all of your concentration for 10 minutes to decide. I have withheld my vote because I'm not sure what anything past the first two votes is like. I will very often vote "no" but there are times where my "no" vote won't mean anything regardless of whether I made it or I'll consider voting "yes" due to teammates. But if one or two people are quick to vote "no" despite the possible teammate condition, I will not hesitate to cast my vote. And some people will evaluate the game simply because the vote came up. So apparently their votes should be decided for them if they take too long trying to read the game while playing it.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:49:34.212+0000) > > Also a bad choice because it forces votes. If a player sees a surrender vote, but then gets distracted by the actual gameplay before voting and has to spend the rest of the time playing the game instead of casting his vote to continue the match (because he doesn't see an incoming loss), his vote has been forced by the players who want to give up. I would agree with that statement if it didn’t take literally less then a second to say yes or no. > Basically, players shouldn't have their voices dictated by the majority. That is the problem with both your idea and the OP's. In both cases, non-voters have their votes cast for them. Then vote, if you don’t want your actions decided by the majority, vote, that is literally the point of voting.
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=000100000001,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:52:42.737+0000) > > I would agree with that statement if it didn’t take literally less then a second to say yes or no. > > Then vote, if you don’t want your actions decided by the majority, vote, that is literally the point of voting. If I say "neither yes or no", it should not be changed to "yes" just because 2 or 3 other people (out of 5 total) voted yes. If 2 people vote yes and 1 votes no with 2 undecided, the proposed system would make the 2 yes votes into 4. This means a MINORITY has made the decision when 2 of the votes either couldn't decide or didn't get around to it. What's being described here is not a dictation of actions, but a dictation of voice. My vote should not be cast for me under any circumstances.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=0009000000010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:42:02.459+0000) > > It was on the boards and dealt with my main account, Busty Demoness. I could be wrong in terms of whether it was later actioned on but I know it wasn't quick by any means. Hm. That'll be a pain to find. Any recollection of whether it was a thread you made, or about when the exchange took place?
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=00090000000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:46:17.356+0000) > > Hm. That'll be a pain to find. Any recollection of whether it was a thread you made, or about when the exchange took place? It wasn't a thread I made but I should be able to find the time frame after logging in on my main. EDIT: It was roughly 5 months ago.
: Yeah there are some odd edge cases like 4-0 somehow not counting as a unanimous decision because the guy who is AFK didn't vote. A simple solution would be that non-votes count as whatever the majority of cast votes were. So the decision still lies with the majority but not voting can't screw it up.
> [{quoted}](name=Metal Janna,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=dQZVslZW,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:45:16.024+0000) > > Yeah there are some odd edge cases like 4-0 somehow not counting as a unanimous decision because the guy who is AFK didn't vote. > A simple solution would be that non-votes count as whatever the majority of cast votes were. So the decision still lies with the majority but not voting can't screw it up. Also a bad choice because it forces votes. If a player sees a surrender vote, but then gets distracted by the actual gameplay before voting and has to spend the rest of the time playing the game instead of casting his vote to continue the match (because he doesn't see an incoming loss), his vote has been forced by the players who want to give up. Basically, players shouldn't have their voices dictated by the majority. That is the problem with both your idea and the OP's. In both cases, non-voters have their votes cast for them.
: If people don't vote in a surrender it should go based off the majority who did vote
Gotta say "no" because I know players will ask for non votes to not count against early surrenders. We already have tons of giving up just because of bad starts and I'm sick of players trying to treat the game like Fortnite levels of commitment are sufficient.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=00090000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:24:55.408+0000)When discussing the Mature Content rule, I had been banned for calling out a discrepancy between what Djinn had said was allowed and what was acted on. The reason given: "We are the enforcing party and we will show it." The content deemed okay [when it wasn't] was never acted on. That seems odd. Was that one the boards or on Discord? Was it on this account? I'd like to look into this.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=000900000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:28:27.002+0000) > > That seems odd. Was that one the boards or on Discord? Was it on this account? I'd like to look into this. It was on the boards and dealt with my main account, Busty Demoness. I could be wrong in terms of whether it was later actioned on but I know it wasn't quick by any means.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=000900000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T22:46:38.770+0000) > > DragonTroopBeta's permanent ban from boards established the double standards held. Please. Not even remotely accurate. > And it's where I was threatened with a permanent ban by Wuks to make me stop posting about it just because I kept marking the inconsistencies of the permanent ban. Show me this threat. > That was well over a year ago and I'm still seeing double standards now. There's a lot of effort put in to make certain this is not the case and I regularly discuss potential instances of those things with the crew when I see something worth noting as an example to learn from. I don't see what you think you see on a regular basis and most of what I see is often actions taking a while to happen because the staff is spread thin.
> [{quoted}](name=oOBestEveNAOo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=0009000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T23:11:14.653+0000) > > Please. Not even remotely accurate. Escalated to permaban after being banned for 1 week, a punishment Keyru offered to reduce. 2 week suspensions are the last warning threshold. > Show me this threat. Thread was deleted as I recall because of necro. I'll see if I can find it. > There's a lot of effort put in to make certain this is not the case and I regularly discuss potential instances of those things with the crew when I see something worth noting as an example to learn from. I don't see what you think you see on a regular basis and most of what I see is often actions taking a while to happen because the staff is spread thin. I have had a case where my post was removed while another was not, both posts were clearly breaking the rules and the mod I dealt with said "I thought about removing it". This was dealt with in the discord. When discussing the Mature Content rule, I had been banned for calling out a discrepancy between what Djinn had said was allowed and what was acted on. The reason given: "We are the enforcing party and we will show it." The content deemed okay (when it wasn't) was never acted on. No, I'm not inclined to believe changes will happen at this point. It is why I refuse to volunteer for boards moderation because I do not see a group worth dealing with on a regular basis. There was a time when I was ready and willing. That time has passed and it's not coming back without a lot of changes that simply won't happen.
Sukishoo (NA)
: Sounds like all the people on the forum that claim to be diamond when posting from low level accounts.
> [{quoted}](name=Sukishoo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Tc1t8NfB,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-03-03T19:53:52.391+0000) > > Sounds like all the people on the forum that claim to be diamond when posting from low level accounts. I actually hate it when an unranked account makes extremely generic "git gud" post that has no backing at all, such as "just walk around Yasuo's Windwall!"
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=0009000000010000,timestamp=2019-03-03T19:25:41.066+0000) > > Yes. But if nothing's going to change, why should I bother? Because things will change when active community members make good valid points. How many years have you been around and exactly how much evidence of this do you need before you realize that's how things work. Look at how much has changed for GD due to the efforts of our most active community members who make valid points about potential changes that are of benefit. Some of those changes were even in part due to your own contributions. You know I love you BD, but come on man.
> [{quoted}](name=oOBestEveNAOo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=00090000000100000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T19:39:41.622+0000) > > Because things will change when active community members make good valid points. How many years have you been around and exactly how much evidence of this do you need before you realize that's how things work. Look at how much has changed for GD due to the efforts of our most active community members who make valid points about potential changes that are of benefit. Some of those changes were even in part due to your own contributions. > > You know I love you BD, but come on man. DragonTroopBeta's permanent ban from boards established the double standards held. And it's where I was threatened with a permanent ban by Wuks to make me stop posting about it just because I kept marking the inconsistencies of the permanent ban. That was well over a year ago and I'm still seeing double standards now. So tell me, do I need dozens of cases for it to change or is this not enough evidence for me to go "yeah, nothing will change because the moderation circle won't let it change".
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=00090000,timestamp=2019-03-03T15:02:23.887+0000) > > I've had posts removed as being disrespectful simply because the mod doesn't like them or me. > > It's happened with at least 2 moderators so far. Can you provide proof of this?
> [{quoted}](name=ChickenWrap,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=000900000001,timestamp=2019-03-03T19:15:40.214+0000) > > Can you provide proof of this? Yes. But if nothing's going to change, why should I bother?
: What about Virus Karthus?
Karthus is humanoid enough he can go to either Project or Program. Virus still isn't entirely out of the question though as his wall and ultimate still fit the thematic.
: That dude in the screenshot mentioned a furry hentai game is no one going to bring that up?
> [{quoted}](name=YoRHa 9S,realm=OCE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=bmXq2FKM,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2019-03-03T06:49:12.974+0000) > > That dude in the screenshot mentioned a furry hentai game is no one going to bring that up? Fantasy based, not furry. There's others that actually are furry based but that particular game does not focus on them.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Kunoichi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=00090000,timestamp=2019-03-03T15:02:23.887+0000) > > I've had posts removed as being disrespectful simply because the mod doesn't like them or me. > > It's happened with at least 2 moderators so far. That is not common practice and is strictly forbidden. If a moderator were to do that, they would soon be caught red-handed and met with disciplinary measures.
> [{quoted}](name=KDA Umbra,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=000900000000,timestamp=2019-03-03T15:51:42.978+0000) > > That is not common practice and is strictly forbidden. If a moderator were to do that, they would soon be caught red-handed and met with disciplinary measures. Apparently not within the circle of these moderators. Nothing has been done anytime I called it out so I expect nothing to be done.
: There's a difference. One is direct (personal) and the other isn't. Example: "You are stupid" - actionable "All people are stupid" - not so much However, I would err on the side of caution, cause calling the mods monkeys multiple times in the same thread is just provocation at this point.
> [{quoted}](name=KDA Umbra,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fJ4MEUiW,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2019-03-03T14:45:12.620+0000) > > There's a difference. One is direct (personal) and the other isn't. > > Example: "You are stupid" - actionable > "All people are stupid" - not so much > > However, I would err on the side of caution, cause calling the mods monkeys multiple times in the same thread is just provocation at this point. I've had posts removed as being disrespectful simply because the mod doesn't like them or me. It's happened with at least 2 moderators so far.
Show more

Busty Kunoichi

Level 65 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion