: I am permanently suspended for no reason
Your account was locked simply for security measures. If you've already written into support, they'll help you from there.
Erdrik (NA)
: ! Oh? has there been an announcement or official note of this somewhere? Not saying it didn't happen, just want something quotable for future reference.
You can receive reporter feedback from more than just the last game you played.
: ty for commenting. btw, why would it send him a verbal toxicity email? isnt there emails for feeders or does it just do this
It's determined by the reports players use. If the players are using both, the system will make the best "guess" as to what the players are trying to convey, and since it was *definitely* not feeding, it opted to send the verbal logs.
Beoridas (NA)
: it was quite difficult to read it. lots of commas missing my friend.
Sometimes proofreading time just isn't available :P you'll have to live with my atrocious run-on sentences for now.
: Proof that the automated system is broken?
What you're actually doing is consistently throwing games at the last minute or trolling by doing things like standing in base/towers and refusing to level up/use skills throughout the entire game (across multiple games). Just because you're not using chat to be offensive or feeding doesn't mean what you're doing isn't reportable or punishable. Players report you because you're intentionally throwing games, but because you're not doing it by *feeding* players are choosing to report you for both feeding and offensive language to report you for intentionally refusing to cooperate. The reform card you receive is determined by the reports you receive, hence why you are being sent ones meant for chat abuse.
: YOU GUYS !! NEED HELP , TOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WANTS YOUR SUPPORTS!
I agree that the chat logs being sent aren't helpful for the sake of conversation/petitioning one's suspension, but looking at the accounts the players in these threads are leaving out some details about their activity and why they actually got punished. Remember, while the chat logs can't be sent for them just yet, that pre-/post-game toxicity is still punishable if reported, and trolling in-game in an attempt to circumvent detection is just as punishable.
: Yes, it would count. *Time* is the factor in getting your tier reduced. You must play games to work off chat restrictions, and you must play games (without being legitimately reported) to reduce your risk of punishment. What I mean by that is let's say you are negative and reported for it in 10 out of 10 games. You get punished for a 14 day ban. *You still have a 10/10 record* and need to pad it with positive games to reduce your risk of the next punishment; if you are negative in the next match you're now 11/11. Punishment is, generally speaking, based on the percentage of your games you're toxic in. Play more positive games to make it a smaller percentage.
Small correction: While we take time into consideration, for us to objectively state that a player has reformed we need evidence to suggest that this is true. This means that without any games played, we don't have anything on our end to suggest that the player has reformed and they are ultimately still subject to more severe punishments if they pick up where they left off. As players, we shouldn't be looking at one's *account standing* as a metric of reform, but rather if they're able to distinguish right/wrong in-game and in-the-moment.
: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7464/15925681920_217428d1dd_o.jpg
The tech is all built, we just need to wait for new champ select to finish rolling out globally. You can expect these relatively VERY soon.
lolptwo (NA)
: Then maybe they should reword the "Your recent behavior isn't in line with what most of the community is" Which is actually ironic because it's basically saying. You not responding to verbal abuse isn't like most league players. Which is true because most of Leagues community is extremely toxic haha What is the purpose of a warning if it has no merit? Don't tell me my behavior wasn't in line when it was or else when my behavior is actually not in line, I will know no better, or have zero understanding of the threshold of what is acceptable or not acceptable. This isn't for people clearly being an asshole btw this is for anything
This is a fair point, but prior to the instant feedback system's it actually *did* assess more than just "did player receive a report y/n". The text just hasn't been updated, and likely will not be given the impending removal of the current Behavior Alert system. Moving forward, we'll be replacing the current iteration of Behavior Alerts/warnings with one that interacts directly with the instant feedback system. Warnings will come with reform cards, and as a result should never be a surprise or confusing to the recipient. We'll have more info when it's available.
: I am replying to your pre-edited post. If the evidence is presented, why do you demand _additional_ actions from the player/community (by submitting a report ticket) instead of taking immediate action as a well-reputed company should? And it shouldn't matter if it happened in the OP's recent match history or not, clearly there was a troll out there running rampant as evidenced by each game occurring one right after the other ruining 9 other players' ranked queues. There are lots of trolls/feeders that scoff at the idea of being reported and it's no wonder why, when they can go 9+ games before being "detected" by the system.
Evidence that the system isn't working as well as it could be is good and even appreciated, but to prevent witch hunting from being a thing we don't promote the specific targeting of players on Boards. Tickets are a great way to let us know something unsatisfactory is happening in-game if the goal is to fix it; that's what Player Support wants to do! Fix problems to help players. Recent match history is only a concern because we make constant adjustments to the system. As I mentioned in my post, we're testing out some new changes; in fact, we're constantly making changes all the time! Players write in to support, and the agents go "hey Slumber Jack this punishment (or lack thereof) is garbo" and we look into it to find out why the garbo punishment did (not) happen. Knowing when this happened helps me understand what the system was capable of finding at the time of abuse. Finally, while this still is a really unfortunate case of someone feeding, this is just one case; we ban *hundreds* of players on NA alone **every day** for trolling/feeding due to reports, thousands world wide. We do the best we can, but we can't catch everyone without risking punishing innocent players.
LankPants (OCE)
: It's his wifes account. Check the match histories of his recently played with/most played with summoners and you'll find the guy easy enough.
Cool -- "straight-up missed" that detail, I did. I'll look into it from here.
Jaawn (NA)
: @Riot: This Feeder is Ruining Ranked
**EDIT**: So! The good-ish news. It turns out I already banned them a few days ago. We were reviewing how changes to how we do detection might help close the gap between players we catch/miss and this fella came up. So they're gone. Going forward: as I mentioned, we're testing some changes to how we detect feeders/trollers(!) right now, and those changes are what actually caught this player. We don't want to push the changes into the automated instant feedback system without being sure we won't hit innocent players, but you can expect improvements very soon. We're pretty happy with the results so far (see: this guy that would have been hit sooner). ~~Mind writing in a ticket to support? I don't see one from you in regards to this case, and this player isn't present anywhere in your recent match history (unless I'm straight-up missing something).~~ ~~Tickets to support in situations like this help us identify cases where something in our detection isn't working as well as it could be. While the current iteration of our feeding/trolling detection is conservative, this~~ -- ~~assuming it's a recent screenshot~~ -- ~~seems off to me, as it does to you guys.~~
: Seems like the sorta post that should be stickied, right? So players might actually see it?
: While i know nothing about the support system for this kind of situation as I haven't been banned before. It seems like there is something to be said with people coming here to the boards being banned and not sure why. While they probably knew better than to share their accounts with boosters they still don't know that the booster may have used a script or something and it seems like player support isn't telling them this. Like i said, I don't know how the support system handles these cases and I suspect there are far more that exist than the ones where people have come to the boards only to be smited down by rioters who look into the case, but it seems like in the original email where he was banned it did not specify what the third party software was which led to this confusion. And it seems he wasn't told any of this through player support, ie the, your account was shared then and thats where the scripting came from. Wouldn't it save a lot of embarrassment for the punished player and some time for you here if the automated messages were more specific about the ban and if the player support gave more information when requested? Like I said, I haven't experienced the player support system in this kind of situation (thankfully) so I don't know if this is already the norm or not. I'm just making an observation based on some of the threads like this i've seen.
Player support is also empowered to look into these cases to make sure there's no error, but the response is usually the same: it's the players' choice to give someone else full permission to do whatever they please with their account, which includes allowing someone to use their account to script, and it will be them who are held accountable. For most of these cases that we're clarifying here, the person borrowing the account was using scripts to boost it, so the owner wasn't being considerate of how other players would feel about being unfairly placed against a higher-skilled/scripting opponent in the first place.
BADxW0LF (NA)
: Pretty sure he meant in Team Builder where you queue up in the role you want...period. No complaints from me cause I like the new champ select and don't play team builder. Just wanted to clarify something that it seemed you misunderstood. The idea of picking the role you want for teambuilder and automatically getting it no matter what was what was appealing to a lot of people. This, yeah you have more chances than not to get the role you want in regular pick games, but not compared to team builder where it was 100% guaranteed that you get it.
Ah, that's fair; I mentioned this at the top of the thread, but the TeamBuilder you guys are referring to was a blind pick variant compared to this iteration which is specifically draft. We're gathering feedback/sentiment today and will use anything we get when we introduce the blind pick variant of new champ select.
: PBE is about finding bugs not feedback.
Not entirely; we accepted general feedback! The lock-in feature was a really good example of this; lots of players found it *confusing* (lots of queue dodges due to locking in fails) but otherwise *much preferred*. This helped us make sure it was as apparent as possible with both the pop-up you receive the first time you log in and the first time you try the new champ select. That being said, a lot of our PBE time was dedicated to fixing a critical bug that caused as much as 10% of our testing players to not be able to make it through champ select :P That kind of stuff you don't want to test on live servers. General feedback, everywhere, yes please. Critical bugs, no.
Calabok (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Riot SlumberJack,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=y1VttssE,comment-id=001000030000,timestamp=2016-01-15T00:20:31.122+0000) > > I don't think we're really forcing anyone to play roles; players get to pick their two favourite roles (or fill), and we do our best to give them their first pick. We do 2 options because, well, sometimes two people want to play the same thing and rather than have it break out into an argument *during* champ select (which sets the tone for the rest of game), it's settled before even going in. > > Also remember we're allowing the option to play with more friends, so having people play with you who are bought into unconventional comp experience is also an option. Off-meta, ahoy! > > We'll keep monitoring how the champ select process is actually playing out for draft mode, and if there's anything that looks concerning we'll look into it. I don't have two favorite .. just one and have NO desire for a second. Don't rob me of my one.
You were never guaranteed your "one" in ranked/normal draft before; in fact, you're more likely get it now than before. There's a lot more *give* than *take* here. Give it a few tries before you dismiss the idea altogether; we just reactivated the queue!
: How about if "None" was an option for the 2nd role? And anyone who put that as a 2nd role would be forced into whatever extended wait resulted from limiting themselves to one and only one role?
Well, that's not terribly fair for other players who would love to play with you but now have to wait for someone else of a similar skill level to pick *exactly* what they need as their first preference, is it? Might not seem like a lot in a one-off scenario, but add up the amount of cases of people who want to play mid- or ADC-only and this becomes an unscalable solution.
gottrjr (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Slumber Jack,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=y1VttssE,comment-id=001000030000,timestamp=2016-01-15T00:20:31.122+0000) > > I don't think we're really forcing anyone to play roles; players get to pick their two favourite roles (or fill), and we do our best to give them their first pick. We do 2 options because, well, sometimes two people want to play the same thing and rather than have it break out into an argument *during* champ select (which sets the tone for the rest of game), it's settled before even going in. > > Also remember we're allowing the option to play with more friends, so having people play with you who are bought into unconventional comp experience is also an option. Off-meta, ahoy! > > We'll keep monitoring how the champ select process is actually playing out for draft mode, and if there's anything that looks concerning we'll look into it. Drafting is too slow. With TB you could hop into a game rather quickly in the role you wanted. Now it takes forever to go through bans and picks. God forbid if somebody doesn't lock in.
Drafting is inherently slower than blind pick -- since the latter doesn't require you to interact with the enemy team -- so this is to be expected. A blind pick variant is on its way which will retain the speed of TeamBuilder Classic (which in essence, was a blind pick mode). However, this experience from start-to-finish should be consistently faster than the old draft modes.
Meanie40 (NA)
: So, when are we getting reporting in Champ Select? I'm not wasting 20 minutes of my time to report someone who takes a role other than the one assigned, and it's unfair that I should be time penalized by dodging as a result of others' behavior. https://ask.fm/RiotLyte/answers/134527935170
As Lyte suggested in that post, if we identify issues with how players behave in the new champ select post-launch we'll look into a reporting feature.
: > [{quoted}](name=Slumber Jack,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=y1VttssE,comment-id=0010,timestamp=2016-01-14T23:06:08.439+0000) > > In the future, there will be a queue that uses the new champ select that will be without bans/drafts and will have potential mirror matches a la TeamBuilder Classic. We're just focusing on draft modes at this very moment. A rioter in my thread ! Im grateful. However, bringing the new champion selector to blind brings little if no answers to the issues at hand. Its a simple way to disguise the "preparation time" of a game in a mode where there should already be little. BUT that is not the issue. The issue is forcing people to play roles. I predicted mass dodging and I was half right, but the true answer to the system comes from players themselves : people go in and try to play the role they selected even if they dont get picked for it. To me, this is probably worse than dodging since it makes for a much worse game experience. People should go ahead and downvote since I dont agree with a rioter, but hey, im just a casual player , so....
I don't think we're really forcing anyone to play roles; players get to pick their two favourite roles (or fill), and we do our best to give them their first pick. We do 2 options because, well, sometimes two people want to play the same thing and rather than have it break out into an argument *during* champ select (which sets the tone for the rest of game), it's settled before even going in. Also remember we're allowing the option to play with more friends, so having people play with you who are bought into unconventional comp experience is also an option. Off-meta, ahoy! We'll keep monitoring how the champ select process is actually playing out for draft mode, and if there's anything that looks concerning we'll look into it.
shyv (NA)
: okay thank you, i'm just kind of confused about the whole punishment system and i can never tell if my account is in good standing or not.. are you saying the warnings are a sign that i might be punished? i think a lot of them are just "im mad about losing, who can i report to make myself feel better" kind of reports. but if someone were to look at my chat logs i think out of context it would look bad because me and my friends jokingly harass each other a lot and call each other bad, after something stupid like, missing a creep or dying once while being 12-1. i've definitely improved my behavior a lot since the ban and i don't think any of those reports would be valid, but i wonder sometimes if something taken out of context would be permaban worthy, so getting those messages makes me a little worried lol
The goal is to make it so a player always understands where they are in the escalation path; are they just starting to get flagged for poor behaviour, or are they in need of immediate reform? We could always do a better job of making it apparent as to what's next for your account and why you're receiving the kinds of punishments you are. Improving warnings should definitely help.
: > [{quoted}](name=Slumber Jack,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=Mo7u5Emi,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2016-01-14T23:01:19.309+0000) > > Warnings are currently not directly tied to the instant feedback system, and are not truly indicative of an impending punishment at this moment. This will be changing very soon so that when you receive a warning, subsequent punishments from the instant feedback system will escalate you the punishment ladder as normal. What does this mean exactly? will the message change? will you only get pop ups when you are about to get punished? I get falsely reported very often.
Yeah, it'll be much more apparent that it's part of the instant feedback system. Also, don't worry about false reports; we filter them out incredibly well and they shouldn't be a concern for anyone.
: Teambuilder was the best thing
In the future, there will be a queue that uses the new champ select that will be without bans/drafts and will have potential mirror matches a la TeamBuilder Classic. We're just focusing on draft modes at this very moment. **EDIT 14:26pm PST:** We'll start a conversation about the state of dynamic queues by EoD Friday (likely in a different place than this thread). In the meantime, keep the feedback coming!
: It appears that the new Champ Select has been reverted?
We're just investigating some technical issues which required us reverting the changes temporarily. Keep an eye on that ticker in the upper right-hand corner for updates!
shyv (NA)
: how long does it take for a ban to be given?
Warnings are currently not directly tied to the instant feedback system, and are not truly indicative of an impending punishment at this moment. This will be changing very soon so that when you receive a warning, subsequent punishments from the instant feedback system will escalate you up the punishment ladder as normal.
: So apparently asking if we could ff is negative behavior and bannable???
I think it depends on where the request comes from; is it coming from a place of annoyance, or from a genuine understanding your team did its best but playing beyond a certain point would be *less* fun? Most of the cases I see where it's reportable is directly in response to someone else not doing well which makes them feel bad, or in conjunction with other complaints/negativity that is generally unwelcome. These also tend to come as *demands* which are aggressive -- "just give up" or "ff20", for example. If you want to suggest surrendering, try spinning it positive; it's not always easy for people to admit defeat. "Hey, I think we gave it a good try, but I'm not sure if we can come back" is one way. Or "welp we all have bad games, maybe we should surrender?"; these help to lower the walls people put up when it's suggested a game isn't going well.
: Thanks. I had no idea that asking to report someone for being toxic was a punishable offense.
Asking for others to report in itself isn't reportable; it's all about the execution. If the manner in which you choose to do it detracts from the experience for others, or is perceived as being accusatory, then that's where the reports are likely coming in. For example, how much do you think the enemy team really wants to hear in /all chat about who is doing what on your own team, and when you start pointing fingers who do you think they'll actually assume is the problem child on your team? If you want to report someone, just do that and nothing else.
: > [{quoted}](name=Riot Tantram,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4bwQA8Jq,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2016-01-04T23:38:21.478+0000) > > The vast majority of players will never see any part of a punishment system. I retort with http://imgur.com/CZXWv7i "SlumberJack Rioter" "Simply put, don't get punished like an overwhelmingly majority of the player base and you'll get rewards." And trolls are never banned I just had a troll jinx literally 1 hour ago who told me to commit suicide and then proceeded to go 2-20 which if that isn't intentionally feeding then I cannot fathom what else is. http://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/2058815813/203046822?tab=overview Why don't you aka RIOT put your money where your mouth is and ban this horrible person. Trolls do not get punished RIOT lies. They "pretend" to ban them but actually do not so as to make more money off these players. They need to keep them playing so they don't ban them but if you tell the kid off then guess what 2 week / perma ban for you. You Rioters even contradict each other as per your post compared to slimberjacks.
Ah sorry -- bad grammar on my part. An overwhelming majority of the playerbase never receive any kind of punishment is what I meant, and punishable behaviour is way outside of the norm. I'll go ahead and fix my grammar now.
: (istilldontgetwhatusingatildeasponctuationissupposedtomean) Edit: wow why the downvotes, I **really** have no idea why people use it. For me, it's just the thing that makes "n" become "nh".
It's contextual. Here it's an inflection of the voice.
: Is Riot planning on bringing Tribunal back so fellow players can weigh in on ban decisions and such? Also is Riot planning on doing anything more on the up-rise of bots in ARAM? I just played a game where me and 1 other player were actual humans. I know this isn't the place to ask, and I may be hijacking a post; but it seems others have asked these very questions with no results on answers.
We'll be prioritising the voting system once we've finished rolling out new champion select to everyone and to all queues.
: > [{quoted}](name=Slumber Jack,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=dsQoAnEa,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2015-12-24T19:47:09.420+0000) > > This early on, just make sure the punishments don't escalate (ie you make an honest go at reformation) and you should be fine for season rewards. However, in the future we'll be restricting access to other rewards/gifts that happen throughout the season for the more recently punished, so just keep that in mind. So why do you keep punishing the punished? ex: A player gets a 10 game chat restrict in May....2 months later riot hands out free skins( for a player tank you or w/e the case maybe) except for players that had chat restrictions, suspensions in the last 4 months. Why do that? The players already completed their punishments, why not just let them be instead of keeping the pain train on them? Continuous punishments after serving the initial punishment is a bit extreme, isn't it? Wouldn't it just make the players more spiteful and more toxic knowing that after they serve their "term" they still keep getting punished?
We would love to give players the benefit of the doubt and assume they're reformed after playing *just* 10 games of chat restrictions... but regardless of how many we give them, we don't know if they're actually being intentional about their reform or if they still have the same amount of potential to create player harm. The chat restrictions in themselves, while a punishment, are mostly meant to just serve as a tool to educate and push a player in the initial correct direction. Playing through them != reform; it just helps a strong majority of players get there.
Myrmiron (EUW)
: Wait... don't only 14 day bans and ACTIVE chat restrictions disqualify you anyways? So, he should be save as long as he manages to finish the 14 games by the end of the season amirite?
You're thinking of season reward eligibility. Reward eligibility is not static for everything, and is still TBD as far as execution on our end is concerned. ~~Simply put, don't get punished like an overwhelming majority of the playerbase and you'll get rewards.~~ Fixing grammar. An overwhelming majority of the playerbase never receives any kind of punishment. Punishable offences are way outside of the ordinary, and so long as you're behaving like the majority of our playerbase -- ie not getting punished -- you'll be fine.
GodJınx (NA)
: I was chat restricted today, I what I've said was wrong, but I just have one question.
This early on, just make sure the punishments don't escalate (ie you make an honest go at reformation) and you should be fine for season rewards. However, in the future we'll be restricting access to other rewards/gifts that happen throughout the season for the more recently punished, so just keep that in mind.
Homeowner (EUW)
: Is there a way to report accounts that are spamming bad links in the teambuilder lobby?
You can write in to support with a screenshot and we'll do a manual investigation.
Rocky2 (NA)
: I'm not a person who rages in game, but if I find myself losing 2 games or more in a row, I always take a break and do something else for a bit, or play a match of ARAM. If I also lose the ARAM, I take a longer break lol.
This is pretty close to what I recommend for players who get stressed playing ranked. My general rule is if I lose 2 games in a day -- doesn't matter if they're in a row or there's a glorious 10-game win streak between them -- I stop playing ranked. I'll usually switch to ARAM or TeamBuilder with friends since those are the most fun/casual environments for me.
: Believe it or not the community is on the toxic side
I'm on a plane right now, but I'll drop in real quick (ish) to give some insight. **A.)** Our forums, and other sites like Reddit, are a passionate and vocal bunch but are not representative of how the greater community acts/thinks. Can't determine the health of the entire community based off a small data set. **B.)** I can understand why this might come up; we've created a place on these forums that are specifically meant for players to talk about their punishments and for others to review/discuss it with them. This is intended; most of our player base understands what is normal/acceptable behaviour and can shine light on what might be a confusing situation to a punished player. Of course, having a solid understanding of what is normal can also mean a player might look at a punished player and say "...really, dude?". It can be difficult to empathise with a punished player. **C.)** I mentioned this in the point above, an overwhelming majority of our players have a very good understanding of what is acceptable/good behaviour and have never been punished. Of the players who have? Almost all of them reform and are perfectly fine afterwards. Also, we're exploring the idea of surrendering early in certain situations, but we're still prioritising new champ select at this exact moment. We want to make sure you actually have that for the 2016 season ;)
: Please get this stickied. Otherwise it'll just disappear relatively quickly while the scam sites are spammed all month.
Raxxxus (NA)
: nice actually got my account back
You were not double tapped for one punishment, you were excessively abusive two games in a row which caused you to receive a 2-week suspension from the first, and while that was processing you played another game escalating it to a permanent suspension. The support agent was nice to give you the benefit of the doubt and a final chance to improve given your behaviour, so please take it seriously.
: Can you please add chat room moderators?
[They're coming.](http://na.leagueoflegends.com/na/site/2016-season-update/social.html)
ElRemino (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Slumber Jack,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=HX1WcfW9,comment-id=00040002,timestamp=2015-12-06T21:06:49.507+0000) > > Hijacking the top post. > > I looked into this game a few days ago, so my bad for not clearing up misconceptions sooner. The tl;dr is the Rioter was incredibly patient with the OP -- even going so far as to be open to still answering questions for him -- despite how antagonistic the OP was towards him from the start of the game. > > As for other players who make rude remarks: {{sticker:slayer-jinx-unamused}} mfw> riot corrupt. the other riot that posted def covering up for the rioter that let his friends shittalk. lol when he no longer has a job and/or got disciplined accordingly. stupid. some rioters think they are above the law. {{sticker:zombie-brand-mindblown}}
If anyone lets their friend be abusive -- Rioter or not -- they're not doing their friend a favour by letting them do something that will get them reported :P Again, if someone did something reportable, you report it. We don't protect accounts just because they are playing with a Rioter.
M1nzy (NA)
: When is the tribunal coming back?
We will be working on the voting system once we've finished up the new champ select.
Dessem (EUW)
: I've literally never seen that message. :( Does that mean the system treats my reports as bogus (and it'd be nice to receive feedback from the system for this), or do I just happen to be paired with people on their bad days and they're normally the epitome of friendliness?
Could be neither. Could be a lot of your reports end up getting a player punished, but they haven't shown a consistent enough trend to warrant one at the exact time you reported them.
: I mean, it's not like Riot Employees are saints or anything, they can act wrongly too you know. Just treat him like a normal person: Is he a dick? Report him, Is he not a dick? Don't. Simple eh?
Hijacking the top post. I looked into this game a few days ago, so my bad for not clearing up misconceptions sooner. The tl;dr is the Rioter was incredibly patient with the OP -- even going so far as to be open to still answering questions for him -- despite how antagonistic the OP was towards him from the start of the game. As for other players who make rude remarks: > [{quoted}](name=Blueslifer,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=HX1WcfW9,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2015-12-05T11:06:05.276+0000) > > Just treat him like a normal person: Is he a dick? Report him, Is he not a dick? Don't. Simple eh?
: Why not? I want to rejoyce and openly laugh at them when flamers threaten to report me.
But then you'd be doing something that's reportable (by escalating the situation), so... _maybe_ not the best idea.
0sergo (EUW)
: how about reports for "refusing to communicate" etc. how do these get handled ?!
That report doesn't exist any more; the use cases were too confusing (that category was meant for players who refuse to cooperate, not people who are quiet), and no one ever got punished for it anyway.
: I think this other post needs your attention more than this one, please: http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/HX1WcfW9-riot-employees-letting-friends-verbally-abuse
NINJA EDIT I responded in the thread.
: How do False Reports work in the game and can you get banned by them?
You cannot be suspended by erroneous reports. If you said nothing, then there's nothing for us to punish and we throw the report away (more or less).
DayNx (NA)
: Riot responding to reports
There is already a system in place for this. While you won't receive feedback for *every* report you make that contributes to a player's case, there is a very good chance you'll receive notification when a player is punished due to your report. If you're not seeing the notifications, the reported players may have had just one bad game (which we try not to punish unless it's *really* bad) or they're working their way towards a future punishment. Make sure you're trying to be as accurate as possible with your reports, too.
B Luv (NA)
: Just looking for thoughts.
The reason we permanently suspend players is because they either exhibit the potential to do something really terrible, or because they go an extended period of time creating pain for others and show no interest or ability to reform. The idea behind reform is to help a player understand that what they're doing is damaging to others, and simply taking away chat completely doesn't solve this because they fail to put into practice their understanding of what is right/wrong. Chat restrictions in their current form are pretty good at this because you have to think more often about the most effective use of your chat; do I want to use my limited chat to work towards winning/helping, or to harass? To make my point clear, in the game for which you were permanently suspended you were also threatening to feed the enemy team. Removing chat privileges altogether likely would not have prevented you from continuing to cause pain.
Show more

Slumber Jack

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion