T0 CR4ZY (NA)
: This is the thing though, you think that I act like this every single game? I do not, in fact I actually get frustrated when I run into players like these. HOWEVER, As I said I was playing with friends. Also I am not justifying any of this behavior, I know what I said wasn't right and I know some of the things I said was overboard. That I am agreeing with, but, a PERMANENT BAN off THIS?! I will explain why this was issued a permanent ban, however it doesn't make it more just. So my account had been actually permanently banned before, But I made a deal with a Riot Support member, stating that my 1st permanent ban will be changed into a 14 day ban. However, if I was to act toxic 1 time, no matter what, I would be permanently banned. And so this game got me a 14 day ban, After I waited the time for this, I played for about a week before they actually issued the permanent ban back because of the deal. Now you may be thinking, yes, I should've followed the deal, and you are right. But let's be real here, how can ANYONE that isn't a robot not slip up one game? This was the only game in my chat log, and the deal was if I was EVER toxic again meaning that even if it happened 3 years later, I still would be permanently banned! How is that even fair?! That's not possible for someone to not slip up, especially from someone coming from a permanent ban, of course I am going to make a mistake because I'm trying to get used to changing my behavior. And this was the mistake I made, I did not know if I insult the enemy team, I would be punished. Never have I ever seen that, and it caused me to lose my account I have been playing since Season 4. And let me be clear, I have been reforming. I have been changing, and I have been playing on other accounts. But it feels so pointless, it feels so empty to not have my main account. This is the account I started on, and I just want to get challenger with it and finish with it, I have the potential, I have hit masters before, I know I can do it but it seriously is frustrating, but the important thing is that I am trying to be a better person. And I have shown that, many times in fact. I have been inted just because people knew who I was and what I did. But they still play, and I have to sit here with my banned main account knowing that I will most likely never get it back. The report system is literally just if you say ANYTHING at ALL, if someone reports you, you are screwed. That is the report system. You rather have that than what I am saying? Look you are legitimately the only person that has made any possible sense, even when talking to Riot Support, so please just understand that someone like me cannot instantly reform. There should be some understanding, it is toxic to assume that I, as someone with legitimate SEVERE mental issues, can instantly be better for the rest of my account duration. I love to play this game, I really do! But it just doesn't feel the same anymore without my main account. And if you can somehow justify how someone isn't supposed to get punished off that deal, then I also have another argument. That definitely was not worth a 14 day ban. Edit: The person I also "threatened" was my friend, I was just joking around. Jokes are very opinion-based, which is why there is different communities for different things.
> This is the thing though, you think that I act like this every single game? I do not. I said you had to have a history of previous misbehavior, not that this is how you act every single game. I will grant that some of my comments (particularly those giving an overview of your behavior) do have some broad-strokes assumptions that there is a degree of consistency to the behavior, but I don't assume that this is every-game behavior. > ...in fact I actually get frustrated when I run into players like these. And yet you stoop to that sort of behavior? That's a little hypocritical, don't you think? > HOWEVER, As I said I was playing with friends. And as I pointed out, you were not exclusively keeping your behavior between you and your friends. Even if you were running with a full 5-man premade (which I doubt, considering that you had to coerce one of your teammates to stop flaming), _you used /all chat **liberally**_. You are not excused from the rules just because you were playing with friends, _especially_ when you're not only affecting friends with your behavior. > That I am agreeing with, but, a PERMANENT BAN off THIS?! I will explain why this was issued a permanent ban, however it doesn't make it more just. > > So my account had been actually permanently banned before, But I made a deal with a Riot Support member, stating that my 1st permanent ban will be changed into a 14 day ban. However, if I was to act toxic 1 time, no matter what, I would be permanently banned. Then...Again, you had a prior history of misbehavior. This permanent ban didn't come out of nowhere, and you _knew_ your account was at stake. You had an agreement with Riot Support. You broke the agreement, and the terms were met. You're not a victim. > But let's be real here, how can ANYONE that isn't a robot not slip up one game? Preventative measures exist. Stress relief methods exist. One can simply _not chat_, at the end of the day, and hell, if I'm not mistaken, the recently-added Disable Allied Chat feature also disables your ability to chat with others wholesale (exempting pings and emotes). You had options. It was your responsibility to seek those options out and pursue them in the interest of maintaining your account. And, as a personal note; quit the "robot" schtick. I mean no disrespect to you when I say this, but it's getting really awful tiring seeing people compare composure with being a robot, or an unfeeling alien, or sainthood. Just, knock it off. People can rein in their emotions, it doesn't make them robots or the umpteenth reincarnation of Buddha. That tangent aside; > This was the only game in my chat log, and the deal was if I was EVER toxic again meaning that even if it happened 3 years later, I still would be permanently banned! How is that even fair?! Why would you strike a deal if the conditions are so unfair? Frankly, I think the conditions you agreed to were more than fair. The Support Agent in question _breached protocol_ and unbanned you, giving you the condition that your first slip-up would be your last. I think that's a pretty fair trade, considering that Riot's standard protocol is _not_ to unban players unless the punishment was issued in error, and that their only term was basically "don't get punished again". You got more chances than most. You should consider yourself lucky. > And this was the mistake I made, I did not know if I insult the enemy team, I would be punished. Never have I ever seen that, and it caused me to lose my account I have been playing since Season 4. Frankly, you should have expected as much would be the case. The rules don't have stipulations about where or how it'd be okay to misbehave in such-and-such way. When the rule is "no flaming", that means "no flaming", period. > The report system is literally just if you say ANYTHING at ALL, if someone reports you, you are screwed. That is the report system. Then how come I'm not banned yet - not even so much as a chat restriction? I've been curt with people, I've pointed out people's mistakes before, I've sworn and griped and taunted people before, and I'm still playing the same account I started with. I talk, _plenty_. If that's the report system, then I should be permanently banned _three years ago_. What it is, is you're blowing everything massively out of proportion. I get that you're upset that all of your progress, all the time and effort and doubtless money that you've put into your account has just gone out the window for the second time now, but you're not going to make anything better by making up this situation of "nothing's allowed, I was punished unjustly because I dared to say 'boo'." I'm going to be blunt; this kind of "impossibility" talk needs to stop. You're not going to get anywhere by saying that you need to be a robot to not slip up, or that you can get banned so long as you say _anything at all_ and get reported. You can't say "I understand I did wrong" and then say all that in the same breath. It's either one or the other, so are you going to accept that you broke the rules, or paint everything as impossible? > Look you are legitimately the only person that has made any possible sense, even when talking to Riot Support, so please just understand that someone like me cannot instantly reform. I understand. I grew up with anger issues, and it took me _years_ to sober up and figure out how to rein in my anger and use it productively; and even then, I slip up. I break down, and I get angry, and the most I can do is push that anger into a harmless direction and let myself burn out. Reform doesn't happen overnight, and even people who have reformed can fall off the wagon. But even in understanding and sympathizing with getting better and slipping up, there's still a lot better you could've done. You made a start, and you made progress, but there's always better to do. Playing on other accounts was a good start, but I think you might've ultimately needed a break from League, or at least Ranked. Distance yourself from your stressors so that you can take time to figure out what's making it stressful. Figure out if there are external stressors that are exacerbating the issue. Get yourself into the right frame of mind before starting back up again. > ...it is toxic to assume that I, as someone with legitimate SEVERE mental issues, can instantly be better for the rest of my account duration. I don't assume instantaneous reform, and I don't think Riot does either. But beyond that, it's beyond us to know what kind of mental issues you have, especially without having been told. > ...I also have another argument. That definitely was not worth a 14 day ban. Unfortunately, it was. While the vast majority of the chat log would likely have warranted a pretty swift and immediate chat restriction, assuming a clean slate; > T0 CR4ZY: IF U CANT PING BARON T0 CR4ZY: UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: IF U CANT PING BARON UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: LOOOOOOOL T0 CR4ZY: PING IT OR GAY T0 CR4ZY: UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: ALL OF U ARE GAY This part here is homophobic. Attaching negative connotations to homosexuality, and also outright claiming "(all of you) are gay", that kind of behavior isn't acceptable. You may not be spouting homophobic slurs, but this still constitutes homophobia.
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=XM1KPs9B,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-12-07T17:17:03.780+0000) > > Continuing the initial comment due to character limit; I know this is in part a result of you quoting a lot of the OP's very long chatlogs, but **damn**. Don't think I've ever seen somebody run out of space while explaining a punishment to somebody. Kudos for typing such a long and detailed analysis.
This is...I think the third time that I've run out of space like this. Failing all else, I aspire to be thorough.
: > It really isn't right, especially to those that have been playing for so many years and they just lose their account off 1 game. It is _exceedingly_ rare for someone to get their account banned off of one game alone. It would take an especially egregious offense (such as death threats) to merit an immediate permanent ban with no prior history; most everyone else who gets a permanent ban typically runs the whole punishment ladder, with a smaller grouping running the escalated ladder (for hate speech/encouragements of self harm). > ...but for Riot Support to say you cannot have your account back because of the chat logs even if they are mild and not malicious? I will even show proof. > --- > > T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct Spamming in the pregame lobby...Not remotely a good start. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: UR FAT LOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: FAT LOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: FATTY Insults. > T0 CR4ZY: stop being toxic dude T0 CR4ZY: im serious T0 CR4ZY: if u are toxic T0 CR4ZY: in my flex game T0 CR4ZY: im going to troll T0 CR4ZY: ok? T0 CR4ZY: yeah thats what i thought Harassment, coercion, and threatening to troll. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: isnt the point of being obese for u to die? [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOL FATTY [All]T0 CR4ZY: do that irl [All]T0 CR4ZY: keep eating [All]T0 CR4ZY: KEEP EATING PIGGY [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAHAHAHA [All]T0 CR4ZY: KEEP EATING BOY [All]T0 CR4ZY: U BREAK THE BMI SCALE LOOOOOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: OUTPLAYED LOOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: OUTCLASSED LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL ..."Isn't the point of being obese for u to die?", said "mildly and not maliciously". You continue harassing and insulting, and start throwing out taunts needlessly. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: eEAT UP BOY [All]T0 CR4ZY: U NEED IT [All]T0 CR4ZY: I GIVE U [All]T0 CR4ZY: LMAO OUTPLAYED LOSER [All]T0 CR4ZY: SO BAD [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAHAHAHA [All]T0 CR4ZY: OUTPLAYED [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOL! [All]T0 CR4ZY: OIUTPLAYED!!!1 [All]T0 CR4ZY: 10 IQ PLAYER LOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: MORE LIKE 10 IQ IRL LOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: UNIRONICALLY LOSING IN FLEX LOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: LIKE UR MOTHER [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: BACK TO MCDONALDS [All]T0 CR4ZY: GOOD BYE LOLOLOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: BACK TO MCODNLADS [All]T0 CR4ZY: I FLIP U TO MCDONALDS [All]T0 CR4ZY: ISNT THE POINT OF PLAYING LEAGUE TO WIN LOOOOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: ABSOLUTELY OUTCLASSED FISHY [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAVE FUN WITH UR WEIGHT [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAHAHAHAHA [All]T0 CR4ZY: FATTY LOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAVE FUN GETTING A GED LOOOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATES [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATES [All]T0 CR4ZY: GOOD BYE UR TURRET [All]T0 CR4ZY: BYE BYE TURRET [All]T0 CR4ZY: BYE BYE UR LIFE [All]T0 CR4ZY: LATA BITCH TAKE MY GOLD [All]T0 CR4ZY: U NEED IT [All]T0 CR4ZY: TO BUY MORE BURGERS [All]T0 CR4ZY: if u think im serious LOL ur out of ur mind [All]T0 CR4ZY: IMAGINE BREAKING THE BMI SCALE HAHAHAHAA [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOSER [All]T0 CR4ZY: -12 FLEX LP [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOSER [All]T0 CR4ZY: IMAGINE WORRYING ABOUT GETTING A GED LMAO 37 more lines of rampant harassment, insults, and excessive taunting, the majority of those taunts _also_ being laced with insults. If you think saying what amounts to "i'm not serious here lol" or "jk" is going to outweigh _practically a full chat log's worth of insults and harassment_, you're dead-wrong. > T0 CR4ZY: ping it idiot T0 CR4ZY: IF U CANT PING BARON T0 CR4ZY: UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: IF U CANT PING BARON UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: LOOOOOOOL T0 CR4ZY: PING IT OR GAY T0 CR4ZY: UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: ALL OF U ARE GAY More insults, and blatant homophobia. > T0 CR4ZY: UNDERSTANBABLE T0 CR4ZY: understanbable T0 CR4ZY: bable T0 CR4ZY: bablbe T0 CR4ZY: lbableb T0 CR4ZY: l T0 CR4ZY: b Some more spam... > T0 CR4ZY: stop flaming dude T0 CR4ZY: what did I say A little irony, as well as what I assume is reiterating your threat of "stop being toxic or i troll". _Non-maliciously_. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: DO NOT DO BARON [All]T0 CR4ZY: BARON IS ILLEGAL [All]T0 CR4ZY: IF U TAKE IT UR DISQUALIFIED [All]T0 CR4ZY: AND HEREBY MUST DECLARE DEFEAT [All]T0 CR4ZY: DUDE STOP FLAMING THEM [All]T0 CR4ZY: I TOLD YOU [All]T0 CR4ZY: TO STOP T0 CR4ZY: OPEN UP THE GATES [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOL LOSER [All]T0 CR4ZY: ONLY 3 FRIENDS [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATYES [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATES [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATES Frankly, even in jest, this is asinine. I think it's made worse by the fact that you spent the majority of this match harassing and insulting other players, alongside threatening to troll. That, and the caps lock. Like, for real, a good half of your chat log is in full caps. > All of this was for fun. I was playing ranked flex with my friends, We were messing around in chat and by the way I even have proof for this: > > [All]T0 CR4ZY: if u think im serious LOL ur out of ur mind Well, it doesn't seem like you were in a full, five-man premade (considering you had to threaten to troll to get someone to stop flaming), and beyond that, you didn't keep your chat contained to just your friends; you made the entire enemy team deal with it. Much of your chat log was in /all chat. And like I said earlier, saying "lol jk" or whatever amounts to that halfway through a chat log _chock full of insults_ isn't going to mean _anything_. "I'm just joking" isn't a catch-all excuse - it's hardly even an excuse for small shit. > I told them I wasn't serious, it was all a joke... Jokes tend to be funny. > ...and regardless I was still banned because the automated system deemed it to be toxic. Because it was toxic. You spent the majority of your chat in that game harassing and insulting players, spamming taunts and insults, the vast majority of it being done in full caps. Maybe next time you want to joke around, use actual jokes instead of offensive insults? Food for thought. > I also do have counter arguments for what I said. > > I called them fat because he was playing Gragas, which is a fat champion, so I was saying he was fat as his champion as a joke. It doesn't matter if they were playing Gragas or not. Even if you were joking about Gragas being fat, you went _**waaaaaay**_ overboard. So far overboard you've commandeered another ship entirely, and jumped off _that_ one for a swim. Seriously, look at what you said. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: isnt the point of being obese for u to die? > > [All]T0 CR4ZY: keep eating [All]T0 CR4ZY: KEEP EATING PIGGY [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAHAHAHA [All]T0 CR4ZY: KEEP EATING BOY [All]T0 CR4ZY: U BREAK THE BMI SCALE LOOOOOOOOOOOL > > [All]T0 CR4ZY: BACK TO MCDONALDS [All]T0 CR4ZY: GOOD BYE LOLOLOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: BACK TO MCODNLADS [All]T0 CR4ZY: I FLIP U TO MCDONALDS > > [All]T0 CR4ZY: LATA BITCH TAKE MY GOLD [All]T0 CR4ZY: U NEED IT [All]T0 CR4ZY: TO BUY MORE BURGERS There's a point when jokes stop being funny. Your "fat" jokes stopped being funny at the first line. And then you just went and got worse, and worse, and worse. > Everything of what I said was meant to be a joke. I tried to make it clear but guess it wasn't clear enough. Riot's argument for this is even though it's a joke, it still effects people because of what is said in the chat. The thing is though, how could it effect anyone if I clearly stated it was a joke? Clearly stated? You mean this? > [All]T0 CR4ZY: if u think im serious LOL ur out of ur mind This little tidbit that 1) gets lost amidst the full-caps insult festival, 2) only serves to try and brush off responsibility for the insults, and 3) _is an insult in and of itself_? You didn't clearly state that it was a joke at any point in the chat log. If this one line was you "clearly stating it", then you failed spectacularly at explaining that you were joking. And how could it effect anyone... > [All]T0 CR4ZY: isnt the point of being obese for u to die? How could it...Or are you still not being serious here. If you can read the entirety of your chat log, and seriously _not_ see how someone could be affected by all your taunts, harassment, and insults, then I really don't know what to say. > They also have the option to mute, so why didn't they just mute if it effects them that bad? The mute feature is a band-aid solution, and it would not prevent them from suffering the initial harmful effects of your abusive chat. It also would not excuse you from being so disrespectful and inflammatory throughout the match; hence why you got punished. And, even beyond that, it's not an either/or situation. People can mute _and_ report you, and you'd still wind up with the punishment. > Look I am sorry but if you cannot take a joke in chat, why are you playing a multiplayer game in the first place? I don't see a single joke in your chat logs. --- Continued in a second comment due to character limit.
Continuing the initial comment due to character limit; --- > Which leads to me to fixing the report system, I say announce a re-read of the banned players if they choose to, take into account the situation and the explanation they are giving, and unban them if they are not in the wrong. I can already tell you that's not going to happen. Your own explanation didn't hold up in the slightest. I've seen countless permabanned players try to explain their behavior on these boards, and - ignoring the obvious outliers of those who were unjustly permanently banned (which are rare, BTW) - pretty much _all of them_ failed to give a compelling argument. > Imagine, losing your account that you have been using for so many years off 1 game. Scary thought but it's a reality, I am a victim, I'm sure many other people are a victim, I am just tired of this terrible report system still being in the game and there should be change. When someone gets permanently banned, _they earned that punishment._ They had to go through _at least_ three separate punishment tiers (10-game Chat Restriction, 25-game CR, 14-day ban) before getting there, each time warning them of the fact that further misbehavior will result in heavier and heavier punishments down the line - the 14-day ban reform card _explicitly tells players_ **If you misbehave again, you WILL be permanently banned.** Some players run a shorter route to a permanent ban, using hate speech and encouragements of self-harm (which warrants an immediate escalation to a 14-day ban), and they're warned that further misbehavior will result in a permanent ban. And judging by your chat logs, I can guarantee you that you did not legitimately earn a permanent suspension out of nowhere from this one match. You had a history of misbehavior, and you _had_ to have prior punishments of some sort to warrant the permanent ban. The report system is not terrible. There should be change, certainly, but not the kind of change you're proposing or wanting. Your punishment was warranted. Permanent bans are not going to be changed. What _should_ change is your style of jokes and your behavior as a whole. 'Cause like I said; throughout the majority of your chat log, you were insulting, offensive, obnoxious, and even blatantly homophobic. You harassed and coerced and threatened to troll, and that's not something you can absolve with a half-hearted "I'm joking and you should know this". It'd be too little, too late for this account, considering the permanent ban, but regardless, it should still serve as a wake-up call that your behavior isn't acceptable. If you intend to continue playing League of Legends, you need to actually take this punishment as an invitation to figure out what you're doing wrong, and _fix it_. Because if you continue to behave like this, I can just about guarantee you you'll be getting punished over and over again.
T0 CR4ZY (NA)
: Why the current banning system of League of Legends is abusable and unjust.
> It really isn't right, especially to those that have been playing for so many years and they just lose their account off 1 game. It is _exceedingly_ rare for someone to get their account banned off of one game alone. It would take an especially egregious offense (such as death threats) to merit an immediate permanent ban with no prior history; most everyone else who gets a permanent ban typically runs the whole punishment ladder, with a smaller grouping running the escalated ladder (for hate speech/encouragements of self harm). > ...but for Riot Support to say you cannot have your account back because of the chat logs even if they are mild and not malicious? I will even show proof. > --- > > T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct T0 CR4ZY: ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ctrl 6ct Spamming in the pregame lobby...Not remotely a good start. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: UR FAT LOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: FAT LOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: FATTY Insults. > T0 CR4ZY: stop being toxic dude T0 CR4ZY: im serious T0 CR4ZY: if u are toxic T0 CR4ZY: in my flex game T0 CR4ZY: im going to troll T0 CR4ZY: ok? T0 CR4ZY: yeah thats what i thought Harassment, coercion, and threatening to troll. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: isnt the point of being obese for u to die? [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOL FATTY [All]T0 CR4ZY: do that irl [All]T0 CR4ZY: keep eating [All]T0 CR4ZY: KEEP EATING PIGGY [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAHAHAHA [All]T0 CR4ZY: KEEP EATING BOY [All]T0 CR4ZY: U BREAK THE BMI SCALE LOOOOOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: OUTPLAYED LOOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: OUTCLASSED LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL ..."Isn't the point of being obese for u to die?", said "mildly and not maliciously". You continue harassing and insulting, and start throwing out taunts needlessly. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: eEAT UP BOY [All]T0 CR4ZY: U NEED IT [All]T0 CR4ZY: I GIVE U [All]T0 CR4ZY: LMAO OUTPLAYED LOSER [All]T0 CR4ZY: SO BAD [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAHAHAHA [All]T0 CR4ZY: OUTPLAYED [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOL! [All]T0 CR4ZY: OIUTPLAYED!!!1 [All]T0 CR4ZY: 10 IQ PLAYER LOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: MORE LIKE 10 IQ IRL LOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: UNIRONICALLY LOSING IN FLEX LOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: LIKE UR MOTHER [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: BACK TO MCDONALDS [All]T0 CR4ZY: GOOD BYE LOLOLOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: BACK TO MCODNLADS [All]T0 CR4ZY: I FLIP U TO MCDONALDS [All]T0 CR4ZY: ISNT THE POINT OF PLAYING LEAGUE TO WIN LOOOOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: ABSOLUTELY OUTCLASSED FISHY [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAVE FUN WITH UR WEIGHT [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAHAHAHAHA [All]T0 CR4ZY: FATTY LOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAVE FUN GETTING A GED LOOOOOOOOOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATES [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATES [All]T0 CR4ZY: GOOD BYE UR TURRET [All]T0 CR4ZY: BYE BYE TURRET [All]T0 CR4ZY: BYE BYE UR LIFE [All]T0 CR4ZY: LATA BITCH TAKE MY GOLD [All]T0 CR4ZY: U NEED IT [All]T0 CR4ZY: TO BUY MORE BURGERS [All]T0 CR4ZY: if u think im serious LOL ur out of ur mind [All]T0 CR4ZY: IMAGINE BREAKING THE BMI SCALE HAHAHAHAA [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOSER [All]T0 CR4ZY: -12 FLEX LP [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOSER [All]T0 CR4ZY: IMAGINE WORRYING ABOUT GETTING A GED LMAO 37 more lines of rampant harassment, insults, and excessive taunting, the majority of those taunts _also_ being laced with insults. If you think saying what amounts to "i'm not serious here lol" or "jk" is going to outweigh _practically a full chat log's worth of insults and harassment_, you're dead-wrong. > T0 CR4ZY: ping it idiot T0 CR4ZY: IF U CANT PING BARON T0 CR4ZY: UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: IF U CANT PING BARON UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: LOOOOOOOL T0 CR4ZY: PING IT OR GAY T0 CR4ZY: UR GAY T0 CR4ZY: ALL OF U ARE GAY More insults, and blatant homophobia. > T0 CR4ZY: UNDERSTANBABLE T0 CR4ZY: understanbable T0 CR4ZY: bable T0 CR4ZY: bablbe T0 CR4ZY: lbableb T0 CR4ZY: l T0 CR4ZY: b Some more spam... > T0 CR4ZY: stop flaming dude T0 CR4ZY: what did I say A little irony, as well as what I assume is reiterating your threat of "stop being toxic or i troll". _Non-maliciously_. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: DO NOT DO BARON [All]T0 CR4ZY: BARON IS ILLEGAL [All]T0 CR4ZY: IF U TAKE IT UR DISQUALIFIED [All]T0 CR4ZY: AND HEREBY MUST DECLARE DEFEAT [All]T0 CR4ZY: DUDE STOP FLAMING THEM [All]T0 CR4ZY: I TOLD YOU [All]T0 CR4ZY: TO STOP T0 CR4ZY: OPEN UP THE GATES [All]T0 CR4ZY: LOL LOSER [All]T0 CR4ZY: ONLY 3 FRIENDS [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATYES [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATES [All]T0 CR4ZY: GATES Frankly, even in jest, this is asinine. I think it's made worse by the fact that you spent the majority of this match harassing and insulting other players, alongside threatening to troll. That, and the caps lock. Like, for real, a good half of your chat log is in full caps. > All of this was for fun. I was playing ranked flex with my friends, We were messing around in chat and by the way I even have proof for this: > > [All]T0 CR4ZY: if u think im serious LOL ur out of ur mind Well, it doesn't seem like you were in a full, five-man premade (considering you had to threaten to troll to get someone to stop flaming), and beyond that, you didn't keep your chat contained to just your friends; you made the entire enemy team deal with it. Much of your chat log was in /all chat. And like I said earlier, saying "lol jk" or whatever amounts to that halfway through a chat log _chock full of insults_ isn't going to mean _anything_. "I'm just joking" isn't a catch-all excuse - it's hardly even an excuse for small shit. > I told them I wasn't serious, it was all a joke... Jokes tend to be funny. > ...and regardless I was still banned because the automated system deemed it to be toxic. Because it was toxic. You spent the majority of your chat in that game harassing and insulting players, spamming taunts and insults, the vast majority of it being done in full caps. Maybe next time you want to joke around, use actual jokes instead of offensive insults? Food for thought. > I also do have counter arguments for what I said. > > I called them fat because he was playing Gragas, which is a fat champion, so I was saying he was fat as his champion as a joke. It doesn't matter if they were playing Gragas or not. Even if you were joking about Gragas being fat, you went _**waaaaaay**_ overboard. So far overboard you've commandeered another ship entirely, and jumped off _that_ one for a swim. Seriously, look at what you said. > [All]T0 CR4ZY: isnt the point of being obese for u to die? > > [All]T0 CR4ZY: keep eating [All]T0 CR4ZY: KEEP EATING PIGGY [All]T0 CR4ZY: HAHAHAHA [All]T0 CR4ZY: KEEP EATING BOY [All]T0 CR4ZY: U BREAK THE BMI SCALE LOOOOOOOOOOOL > > [All]T0 CR4ZY: BACK TO MCDONALDS [All]T0 CR4ZY: GOOD BYE LOLOLOL [All]T0 CR4ZY: BACK TO MCODNLADS [All]T0 CR4ZY: I FLIP U TO MCDONALDS > > [All]T0 CR4ZY: LATA BITCH TAKE MY GOLD [All]T0 CR4ZY: U NEED IT [All]T0 CR4ZY: TO BUY MORE BURGERS There's a point when jokes stop being funny. Your "fat" jokes stopped being funny at the first line. And then you just went and got worse, and worse, and worse. > Everything of what I said was meant to be a joke. I tried to make it clear but guess it wasn't clear enough. Riot's argument for this is even though it's a joke, it still effects people because of what is said in the chat. The thing is though, how could it effect anyone if I clearly stated it was a joke? Clearly stated? You mean this? > [All]T0 CR4ZY: if u think im serious LOL ur out of ur mind This little tidbit that 1) gets lost amidst the full-caps insult festival, 2) only serves to try and brush off responsibility for the insults, and 3) _is an insult in and of itself_? You didn't clearly state that it was a joke at any point in the chat log. If this one line was you "clearly stating it", then you failed spectacularly at explaining that you were joking. And how could it effect anyone... > [All]T0 CR4ZY: isnt the point of being obese for u to die? How could it...Or are you still not being serious here. If you can read the entirety of your chat log, and seriously _not_ see how someone could be affected by all your taunts, harassment, and insults, then I really don't know what to say. > They also have the option to mute, so why didn't they just mute if it effects them that bad? The mute feature is a band-aid solution, and it would not prevent them from suffering the initial harmful effects of your abusive chat. It also would not excuse you from being so disrespectful and inflammatory throughout the match; hence why you got punished. And, even beyond that, it's not an either/or situation. People can mute _and_ report you, and you'd still wind up with the punishment. > Look I am sorry but if you cannot take a joke in chat, why are you playing a multiplayer game in the first place? I don't see a single joke in your chat logs. --- Continued in a second comment due to character limit.
: riot and theft and women
> after losing a lawsuit riot then proceeds to not correct its suspenion and reporting button and chat being optional to the point of allowing further discrimination against disabled women who game First of all, if you're referring to the lawsuit whose verdict involved a $10k compensation for sexual harassment in the workplace, that has nothing to do with the reporting/punishment system. It was an internal company issue, and had no relation to (and consequently no effect on) the punishment system in-game. Second, you're going to have to explain what you mean by all of the above "allowing further discrimination against disabled women", because I seriously don't understand how any of those things relate. > please note i played a norms one game and in that game i was reported with a 25 chat restrict > lets face it no profanity... You don't need to use profanity to break the rules. In point of fact, profanity is allowed, so long as it's within reason and not levelled to harass or insult other players. > ...and a whole game where morg rage quit lane on one death she blamed me for Other people misbehaving does not exempt you from the rules. > this is sad riot needs to have an option where i can remove chat from the interface or a mute all button so i dont have to inconveintly mute everyone individually each and every game phew They recently added the Disable Allied Chat feature (which if I'm not mistaken, also disables your ability to chat wholesale, but don't quote me on that), and they've had the /muteall command for a while now. > i cannot show you what the x9 enemy team said as my team was against me and the enemy was too i cant show you how much their logic did not stack up Their chat is not included in your chat logs because you were punished exclusively for your own behavior, and nobody else's. Whether they were 9x, 4x, or what have you, it doesn't matter; if you didn't break the rules, you would not have been punished. > and just what is negativity on your reform card... Well, let's see just what your chat logs entailed, shall we? > RikutoXÍ: ur reported jungler RikutoXÍ: xayah is at 10 percent enjoy report ekko RikutoXÍ: a free kill and ekko wont gank RikutoXÍ: so am i RikutoXÍ: if ekko wont gank its over RikutoXÍ: why doesnt jungle gank bot like they used to in season 4 Three lines in and you start harassing your jungler, immediately threatening reports and complaining when they didn't gank you. > RikutoXÍ: this is why riot lost a class action lawsuit RikutoXÍ: as a women ur being toxic to me RikutoXÍ: riot can get sued for allowing you to bully me RikutoXÍ: us women won one court case RikutoXÍ: and riot is not above getting dragged into court RikutoXÍ: ur a woman hater RikutoXÍ: ima report you for being discrimiatinfg against women RikutoXÍ: my support is upset im a girl gamer and is flaming me RikutoXÍ: no wonder girls dont play this game riot discrimantes and allows u to flame and bully us girl gamers RikutoXÍ: its sad my team is flaming me for being a girl i died once and morg rage quit RikutoXÍ: please report morg ...And then you make it into a completely pointless argument about gender. Literally, nobody knows whether you're a girl or not, and even then, you have your information entirely wrong. **_The lawsuit happened due to internal misconduct by Riot employees. It had nothing to do with in-game player behavior._** > RikutoXÍ: i have no support and ulted to wave cleart and my summs arne t an excuse to flame im silver elo RikutoXÍ: guess everybody is against me whatever ill win next game RikutoXÍ: calling me a degenerate okay bcuz riot is okay with that RikutoXÍ: im so held back this game im so much stronger than this RikutoXÍ: ill come back late game RikutoXÍ: thats whhat you want every1 to belive but im better thaan you morg RikutoXÍ: bcuz if i come back everyone will relize ur being a meanie RikutoXÍ: I HAVE HAD NO SUPPORT ALL GAME YOU RAGE QUIT MY LANE KID RikutoXÍ: TO GET VISION RikutoXÍ: UR SO RTOXIC RikutoXÍ: I WENT FOR SCUTTLE SHOWS HOW MUCH YOU CAN PAY ATT TO MAP And the detrimental argument continues up towards the very end of the match. You harassed your Jungler early on, then spent much of the rest of the game harassing Morgana and pursuing unnecessary arguments that detracted from the game. That kind of misbehavior would certainly warrant a punishment.
: riot machine scans for the word report its also against the rules to ask for reports multiple reports don't really do much, unless it is for intentional feeding and that has to be spread over many games
> riot machine scans for the word report No, it doesn't. [Tantram himself has even said that it's more than a simple word-searcher.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/MIBGEN1J-the-issue-with-the-behaviour-system-is-that-it-is-too-black-and-white?comment=0005) > This is not how the system works. It is not a keyword based system. It also isn't that black and white. It is a machine learning system that learns from the community what is acceptable and what is unacceptable. It doesn't just say, 'they said a word on a list, they get punished.'
: Why can't you guys tell the person to edit their post first? Is it really so much work compared to deleting it, and writing a reason? I have had some posts taken down, but no warnings as far as I know, and its kind of annoying to put some effort in keeping the boards living and current, and your effort gets scrapped by surprise.
> Why can't you guys tell the person to edit their post first? Is it really so much work compared to deleting it, and writing a reason? I'm pretty sure that a big reason that they don't comment to the player to edit their post/comment is because of stuff like this thread exactly; the person in question believes wholeheartedly that they're in the right, get argumentative, and with that being set in a comment string instead of its own thread discussing a removal, it'd kind of just derail the thread the player was replying to. It's not a matter of it being more work to reply and ask someone to edit their post, more that it's just altogether better for discussion as a whole if the post/comment were removed and the poster/commenter prompted to make a thread here on _Discuss the Boards_ if they don't understand the reason for the removal.
Saezio (EUNE)
: Tribunal would serve so a lot less cases reach riot eyes. The actual amount of inters compared to accused inters is very different imo. You have to assign scores to the Tribunalists based on how good they judge and they lose their ability to judge if they get many wrong. This way people are discouraged from pressing punish like baboons. Sure it would need a lot of time from rioters at first but as the bad tribunalists start to be weeded out and only the good remain I believe it would be better with each passing day. (I am always talking only about gameplay offences) Riot also needs to punish serial reporters imo. If someone has something like 50% invalid reports they lose their honour. cause let's face it, it's not really honourable to report like a maniac.
> Tribunal would serve so a lot less cases reach riot eyes. The actual amount of inters compared to accused inters is very different imo. That...Doesn't make the idea any better, honestly. The fact that false-positive cases could be passed along for Riot to review and dismiss, while legitimate cases may be missed over and dismissed by imperceptive players leaves a pretty wide (and unacceptable) margin for failure. > You have to assign scores to the Tribunalists based on how good they judge and they lose their ability to judge if they get many wrong. This way people are discouraged from pressing punish like baboons. While that may functionally discourage people from poor use of the Tribunal, that presents two issues; 1) Any report that gets dismissed by the majority of players likely wouldn't count against them if they came to the wrong conclusion. They could dismiss a legitimate troll/intentional feeder and their score wouldn't go down, because the case wasn't sent to Riot to verify. 2) Even perceptive players can have a hard time determining intentional feeding/trolling, so what would happen if they make a series of verdicts which were ultimately found misjudged? Do they lose privileges, despite reviewing and voting honestly? > Sure it would need a lot of time from rioters at first... It would require a lot of time from Rioters in general. Like I said, it's impossible to staff a team dedicated to manually reviewing even just trolling/intentional feeding cases - they wouldn't be able to scratch the surface, and that's not improved any if the Tribunal filters out half of the millions of reports to look at. > Riot also needs to punish serial reporters imo. If someone has something like 50% invalid reports they lose their honour. cause let's face it, it's not really honourable to report like a maniac. If the IFS can determine whether a report is false or not, it really doesn't need to punish people who report zealously. Granted, it definitely isn't sportsmanlike behavior to report others over every little thing, but threatening punishment for false reports would make more than just the target portion of the playerbase unwilling to report others. 'Cause, let's be real - sometimes the line between low-key toxicity and acceptable behavior can get blurry, and I wouldn't want to risk my Honor if the IFS ultimately decided that my reports against a bunch of negative players were invalid. It'd result in people withholding their reports for all but the most egregious cases for fear of being punished themselves, and that's not a good thing to have for the system.
Saezio (EUNE)
: We should let ifs deal with toxicity and have a tribunal like system deal with gameplay offences. Maybe have the last word be that of a rioter. And the "tribunal" kinda only serves to filter out the false reports. But at least with tribunal, people were way more scared to int/troll/afk. And this is a fact, back in season 1-2-3 seeing a RQ was so fucking rare. And even flame was way less common (could be because people weren't so tired of the game though). This passive aggressive "I know best" attitude was hella uncommon back then. People were much more receptive to being told what to build/how to play etc
> We should let ifs deal with toxicity and have a tribunal like system deal with gameplay offences. Maybe have the last word be that of a rioter. Again, having players handle trolling/intentional feeding cases isn't even close to ideal. I can all but guarantee that were players set to determine whether or not someone was intentionally feeding or trolling, we'd doubtless have many more false-positive punishments, just because someone was playing off-meta or was underperforming. And if the Tribunal would have Riot oversight, where a Riot Employee passes the final verdict of the case...Why even have players review the cases in the first place? It's ultimately being passed through Riot to determine whether or not it _was_ trolling/int-feeding, so having players put in their two cents would ultimately be redundant and make it take much longer to review. And then, of course, there's the obvious issue of it being functionally impossible to have enough people handling reviews/overseeing Tribunal cases to so much as make a _dent_ in the amount of reports that go out. Bear in mind, we're talking about a playerbase numbering in the millions, with umpteen-million more matches being played daily, and doubtless a sizeable chunk of those matches involve someone reporting someone else.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=HcocKwIB,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-12-05T20:48:07.858+0000) > > The OP noted that the spike of toxicity was their opinion. So, unless you have some substantial evidence that suggests that there was a legitimate spike of toxicity after the Tribunal was shut down, then I don't see any reason to consider it more than what it's explained as; an opinion. Also since instant feedback reports cant be validated cause its bad to know is gets chat banned its also an opinion that the ifs actually is efficient....
> Also since instant feedback reports cant be validated cause its bad to know is gets chat banned... I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you talking about the inability to see _who_ got punished when you get an Instant Feedback Report, or...? > ...its also an opinion that the ifs actually is efficient.... I don't see how that makes it an opinion as to whether or not the IFS is efficient. Being able to see who got punished has no influence on the IFS' efficiency, and I already detailed just how the IFS is more efficient compared to the Tribunal. If you're going to call the IFS inefficient, you need to back that argument up with substance.
: Reported for language... there is a default language filter
> Why would you penalize players for using curse words when there is an optional language filter active on default... You're not penalized for using curse words. You can say "fuck", "damn", "shit", etc. within reason and never be punished. The issue comes from when you use curse words to break the rules, or level curse words at other players. > The current system is really trashy and innocent responsible people are getting penalized and harassed for making jokes. If you got punished, do feel free to show your chat log(s). 'Cause I very sincerely doubt you were punished simply for swearing or making jokes.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=HcocKwIB,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-12-05T20:20:36.419+0000) > > One of the biggest issues with the idea of bringing back the Tribunal to deal with trolls and intentional feeders is that players are sorely unreliable at discerning legitimate trolling/intentional feeding; people will eagerly vilify someone for simply underperforming, since they'd rather push blame on someone "intentionally" ruining their game rather than face the possibility that they might have been a factor in their own loss. > > To that end... > > I really doubt that you're dealing with trolls or intentional feeders nearly every other game. It's extremely unlikely that you'd legitimately run into trolls and the like _so_ frequently, and even if it were the case, one would think you would take a break and wait for another time to play. > > Well, let's start with the obvious. The Tribunal required players to function, and not many people actively cared to weigh in on Tribunal cases. Whereas the IFS doesn't need people to review and deliberate and vote on people's behavior - it just receives a report, reviews the behavior, and punishes accordingly. > > On top of that, not needing people to review the behavior means that the IFS is infinitely faster than the Tribunal could've ever hoped to be. The Tribunal was slow as all unholy hell (not helped in the least by the low player participation) and built up a massive backlog. The IFS works through far, far more cases than the Tribunal did and in much less time. > > And the Tribunal at one point had to be incentivized through Influence Point rewards for reaching a majority vote - and that panned out terribly, with people simply mass-voting to punish for the IP gains. The IFS avoids that inaccuracy and the need to be incentivized, because it's programmed to just work. > > Frankly, no. The Tribunal was iceboxed for a reason, and it's an outdated, inefficient system. And in regards to trolling and intentionally feeding cases, I would much prefer an automated system that errs on the side of caution than a system that allows players to decide whether or not something is trolling/feeding. > > The system we have right now could certainly be much better at detecting trolling and intentionally feeding, but it's certainly better than what we'd have if we let players decide. So the spike of flame just right after the tribunal is a coincidence i guess....
> **this is just my opinion**, but when tribunal was removed there was a spike in the amount of toxic players in the league community. The OP noted that the spike of toxicity was their opinion. So, unless you have some substantial evidence that suggests that there was a legitimate spike of toxicity after the Tribunal was shut down, then I don't see any reason to consider it more than what it's explained as; an opinion.
: Please Bring back Tribunal
One of the biggest issues with the idea of bringing back the Tribunal to deal with trolls and intentional feeders is that players are sorely unreliable at discerning legitimate trolling/intentional feeding; people will eagerly vilify someone for simply underperforming, since they'd rather push blame on someone "intentionally" ruining their game rather than face the possibility that they might have been a factor in their own loss. To that end... > ...its rare to go more than 2 games without having these type of individuals in a game. I really doubt that you're dealing with trolls or intentional feeders nearly every other game. It's extremely unlikely that you'd legitimately run into trolls and the like _so_ frequently, and even if it were the case, one would think you would take a break and wait for another time to play. > How is "this" so called algorithm more efficient than tribunal? Well, let's start with the obvious. The Tribunal required players to function, and not many people actively cared to weigh in on Tribunal cases. Whereas the IFS doesn't need people to review and deliberate and vote on people's behavior - it just receives a report, reviews the behavior, and punishes accordingly. On top of that, not needing people to review the behavior means that the IFS is infinitely faster than the Tribunal could've ever hoped to be. The Tribunal was slow as all unholy hell (not helped in the least by the low player participation) and built up a massive backlog. The IFS works through far, far more cases than the Tribunal did and in much less time. And the Tribunal at one point had to be incentivized through Influence Point rewards for reaching a majority vote - and that panned out terribly, with people simply mass-voting to punish for the IP gains. The IFS avoids that inaccuracy and the need to be incentivized, because it's programmed to just work. > Should tribunal make a comeback? Frankly, no. The Tribunal was iceboxed for a reason, and it's an outdated, inefficient system. And in regards to trolling and intentionally feeding cases, I would much prefer an automated system that errs on the side of caution than a system that allows players to decide whether or not something is trolling/feeding. The system we have right now could certainly be much better at detecting trolling and intentionally feeding, but it's certainly better than what we'd have if we let players decide.
: What is Evelynn's lore?
> -Evelynn is perfectly capable of inflicting pain with her claws and did so in both the old and new splash art, and it was in her old kit as well. So outside of just being more of a silhouette on her model and a way to make her not just a naked save for shadows demon lady, what does she use the lashers for? For lashing, for lack of better words. Although if they appear to people in her "human" guise, then they could lend an exotic flair to her appearance, making her more alluring, but otherwise, they're lashers for the simplest of reasons. > -Also most demons have some sort of fall from grace or something that conjures them into existence but Evelynn is just kinda here to be a plot device for Vayne? I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. None of the demons in Runeterra have any such "fall from grace"; they're primordial magical beings from the spirit realm, most of whom were - not quite created - but in some way brought to "life" by the Rune Wars. Evelynn in particular woke up to the suffering of mortals in Runeterra during the Rune Wars, and found her insatiable appetite for pain and anguish through it. Beyond that, Evelynn has always been connected to Vayne's lore. It's pretty much always been the case, as far as I know, that Evelynn murdered Vayne's parents. It's just that pre-VGU, it was a demon assassin killing for fun, and post-VGU it was a succubus-esque demon murdering for personal sustenance. > -Why wouldn't she kill Vayne? Does she have the big grand plan? Could she turn Vayne into a demon like herself? After all Vayne has become a cold blooded rutheless monster killing machine and it would make sense seeing as how she's going down a dark road.... I don't know where you're getting the idea that a demon could turn someone into a demon. As far as Evelynn's plans for Vayne are concerned; she _does_ feed off of mortal suffering, so leaving Vayne alive after having her witness her parents' deaths would doubtless leave Vayne suffering a lot of emotional trauma, giving Evelynn plenty to feed on. > -Why does Evelynn eat things like dragon if she feeds off pain? Can demons feed off normal means and just choose to feed of the suffering of others (in Evelynn's case because Tahm quite literally eats people if I'm not mistaken) because it's fun for them and they can do so? I don't think she's being literal with that quote. As far as we know, she doesn't require any physical sustenance and feeds exclusively off of suffering and pain. Tahm Kench's devouring of people is an odd thing, but really only if you try to directly relate gameplay and narrative. I'm sure he does quite literally devour people, but at the end of the day, I'm 90% sure he mostly feeds off of his unique brand of torture. > -...we never really see how Evelynn is on her own. I mean its the same for the other demons in league as well, we only see them in the context of what they hunt, never seeing them how they see themselves and how they conduct themselves while not hunting. So whats Eve truly like? Judging from her Biography, very basic and animalistic. She tailored her body to help her hunt and feed on people's anguish, and seems to act only in the interest of satiating that hunger. So, I don't think there's ever a time when she's _not_ hunting, and even if there was, it would probably still be fairly single-minded.
: Never trust a friend
Unfortunately, there's no way to get this situation fixed. Account sharing in and of itself is a punishable offense, and it's punished with a permanent ban - so even if they were to hypothetically overturn the just ban your friend incurred, they would still leave your account banned for account sharing. Would that there was any better news.
: It actually is punishable (refusing to communicate), just very rare for it to be.
> It actually is punishable (refusing to communicate), just very rare for it to be. Yes and no. Yes in that, refusing to communicate does apply to some certain situations (I.E, massively gameplay-altering off-meta picks, a la CounterJungle Support Singed/Nunu, Mid-Support Teemo, whatever else have you)... But in this case, which is disabling chat and muting pings, no. That is not punishable. It isn't punishable to mute pings (even if you're muting pings from the get-go), and it isn't punishable to disable/mute chat - in point of fact, I'm pretty sure Riot straight-up added that feature semi-recently (with the Mute Allied Chat feature).
: ***
> Ugh I see that you didn't spare a second to stop and actually read what I've written so let me get started: > > People were calling me out and were spamming "report report report", idk I'd say they went on to report me afterwards. But okay, maybe a dog that barks doesn't bite. > > Me saying that you assume things was regarding the previous paragraph - you ASSUMED that I wasn't reported and justified the bot by that sole assumption. And...I'm supposed to know that that was your point without you saying it...How? All you said was: > So basically you said it's not automated system's fault but it's players who won't report you. > > Nothing's gonna come out of that. If you're gonna _assume_ things then we have nothing to talk about. The AI behind this system isn't an optional measure to deal with toxic players. And nowhere in your post or your comments before now was there any mention of players "calling you out" or saying that they were going to report you. And I _did_ point out that your post lacked much in the way of real, workable details; > Yes. As far as all of the details you've given go (and those details are sparse and vague, mind), that's the most logical conclusion. So, yeah. Of course I'm going to make an assumption based off of all the known information. If my assumption is wrong, _you_ are at fault for not giving complete information. It's not my fault you forgot to mention that. > When I said I know how bot's supposed to work I was relating to the fact that I'm aware that bot doesn't have a simple search-for-a-trigger-word-and-issue-a-punishment algorithm. I said that I know it's more than that. If you know that it's not a trigger-word based system, why say anything of the sort in your OP? And if you're going to clarify that you understand as much, why not simply say "okay, I know it's not a trigger-word system"? When you just say "trust me, I know how it's supposed to work", that doesn't tell me that we're actually on the same page. All that tells me is that you think you know the system where I don't. And it doesn't help that it's coupled with the vague "you're just _assuming_" part above. There's a level of miscommunication going on here that, frankly, is making it impossible to have a real discussion. You're leaving out information, making contradictory statements, and then blaming me for not understanding your vague statements. To that end, I'm just gonna bow out. Next time, if you want to discuss something, please put _all_ of the information forward, and _make sure you're clearly stating your points_.
: So basically you said it's not automated system's fault but it's players who won't report you. Nothing's gonna come out of that. If you're gonna _assume_ things then we have nothing to talk about. The AI behind this system isn't an optional measure to deal with toxic players. Instead of _killing_ toxicity, this way of punishing lets players learn how to _be toxic with no consequences_. Take off your blindfold. Trust me, I know how the bot is supposed to work and I know a thing or two about how AI itself works. I'll just tell you that toxicity isn't a logically-oriented decision that AI can make. Why? It's not a logical decision at all but rather a moral one - has this person crossed the line and ruined other players' experience.
> So basically you said it's not automated system's fault but it's players who won't report you. Yes. As far as all of the details you've given go (and those details are sparse and vague, mind), that's the most logical conclusion. You are toxic on your smurf account, but somehow haven't been punished. If you're toxic, then a review would have found you as such and you would have been punished by now; ergo, the review process isn't being started, meaning that players aren't reporting you. > Nothing's gonna come out of that. If you're gonna _assume_ things then we have nothing to talk about. I'm not assuming, though. Riot has stated that [the IFS doesn't work off of trigger words](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/MIBGEN1J-the-issue-with-the-behaviour-system-is-that-it-is-too-black-and-white?comment=0005)... > This is not how the system works. It is not a keyword based system. It also isn't that black and white. It is a machine learning system that learns from the community what is acceptable and what is unacceptable. It doesn't just say, 'they said a word on a list, they get punished.' And Riot Tantram has also [shared a snippet of code from the IFS program that pretty easily proves that no reports = no review.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/9VrUtrJo-being-solo-and-having-a-team-report?comment=0000000000020000000000000000) It's not directly speaking to that fact, (the comment instead being a response to claims of mass-reports) but nevertheless still proves my point. > It's actually really simple. > > if (reports > 0) { > review(); > } A simple If statement checking the value of the reports variable for a number greater than 0 to call the review function; in other words, **no report = no review**, 1 report = review, 4 reports = review, 9 reports = review...Etc. > Trust me, I know how the bot is supposed to work and I know a thing or two about how AI itself works. Do tell. I'd like to see how the bot is _supposed_ to work, especially seeing as your understanding of it contradicts official Riot statements. And do make sure to provide evidence, because I'm not about to take your assumptions of the system at face value.
: Automated punishment system is a joke
I think you're working off of two big misconceptions here; 1) That the IFS is an entirely automated, autonomous system that surveys and punishes without any input required; 2) That the IFS works solely off of "trigger words" and that simply by avoiding said trigger words, you can avoid punishment. Neither of these two statements are true. The IFS, while being an automated system, is not _always autonomously active 100% of the time._ Despite "automated system" being the nomenclature, it _does_ require an initial input in order to function; that initial input, of course, being a report. If you haven't been punished despite flaming a lot on that account (however frequently or infrequently you play on that account), it is probable that _you simply aren't being reported for one reason or another_. The IFS needs a report to trigger a review and subsequent punishment, as a report is really the only way that someone can indicate to the system "this player was bugging me and might have been breaking the rules". So, barring all other possible details, that is the most likely reason (even if it is unlikely) that you're not getting punished on that alt account. No report = no review = no action. --- As for the misconception about trigger words; A lot of people have this idea that the IFS simply scans chat for specific trigger words/keywords that constitute misbehavior; "garbage", "feed", "idiot", "trash", "uninstall", etc., and, while it _does_ have some such functionality, that's reserved for zero-tolerance chat - hate speech and encouragements of self-harm. Stuff where the actual content of misbehavior is in such a small breadth that a keyword search would actually feasibly function. The reality of it is, the IFS is built to actually read people's chat logs and determine what they were saying. It's a machine-learning system, and a substantially complex one at that. You can read any number of posts here on _Player Behavior_ and you'll see many an example of low-key toxicity that uses _zero_ "trigger words" getting punished. So, no; the IFS doesn't work exclusively off of trigger words, and avoiding "trigger words" isn't actually going to help you avoid punishment. Toxicity isn't confined to some set-specific words, and you can be punished for being toxic without using those words.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=iz44l8xf,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-12-01T08:59:32.608+0000) > > The mute feature is a band-aid solution, and it's meant to prevent a player from suffering further ill-effects of chat misbehavior. It is not there to give players an exemption from [the rules that they agreed to at account creation.](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse#code-conduct) > > Whether you like it or not, everyone who makes an account on League of Legends signs up with the promise that they will not abuse the chat feature to misbehave and flame other players. Whether you like it or not, it is a punishable - and, if necessary - _bannable_ offense. Don't like the rules? Them's the 8r8ks. > > I'm not sure where you're getting "technically" from, because they _did_ in fact break the rules, and they _did_ make the game unenjoyable for other players. If they didn't make the game unenjoyable, they wouldn't have been reported, and if they didn't break the rules, they wouldn't have been punished. > > I seriously recommend you read the [Terms of Use - Code of Conduct](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse#code-conduct) as well as the [Summoner's Code](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/featured/summoners-code), as both constitute the rules and behavioral guidelines you're expected to follow in League of Legends. > > Players should not _have_ to mute other players. If you prefer to take out your aggression in-chat towards your teammates, then guess what; players can mute you, and they can also report you. You're not allowed to flame, period. The mute feature does not exempt you from that rule. > > Additionally; I'd really love to see some statistics about the usage of chat for coordination/teamwork. I doubt it's as low as some people like to sell it as. > > Why do people assume that Riot is strictly _focusing_ on chat misbehavior? It's not like they have extremely limited resources and choose to funnel all of them towards chat misbehavior. The IFS - the system that handles chat misbehavior - is automated. So with the exception of cases pulled from the IFS for audit/manual review, they really aren't focusing on chat misbehavior any more than they're focusing on anything else. > > Again; _you're assuming that they aren't trying._ Unfortunately, non-chat offenses aren't something they can just set the IFS to track and punish reliably. Chat offenses are easy; win-trading, trolling, intentional feeding, etc.? Those aren't half as easy. And as it were, simply saying "focus on this instead of chat" isn't going to make it any easier. > > _Both_ are players who ruin games. It's not an either/or situation, and I don't think I've seen anyone even remotely suggest that wintraders/trolls/etc. don't ruin games while flamers do. _Both_ ruin games, _both_ are awful, and _both_ deserve punishment. > > Again; they already _are_ focusing on gameplay misbehavior. > > And as for unbanning flamers; if they got permabanned, then they didn't just "make mistakes in chat". They made _a ton of mistakes_. _**Constantly.**_ Enough so that Riot had to permanently remove them from the game. > > At that point, that's not "making mistakes", that's deliberately flouting the rules. And those players who openly disrespected the rules, even after countless warnings, they're not getting unbanned. Period. If you can't be bothered to play by the rules, Riot can't be bothered to have you playing at all. Quick question is it a bannable offense to make the game unfun for other players, REALLY? Legitimate question here.
> Quick question is it a bannable offense to make the game unfun for other players, REALLY? Legitimate question here. That's not a question with any singular answer. No matter which way you put it, there's always some factor that basically resolves the question to "yes, if it makes the game unfun for other players, you can be punished for it." An example that I know is contentious; excessive negativity. Yes, it may not be with the intention to make the game unfun for other players, but the effect is still the same; excessive negativity and constant complaints wears on people's morale and makes them want to play the game less. Other cases are more obvious; flaming, trolling, intentional feeding, etc., those come with the explicit goal of making the game not just unfun, but straight-up miserable for other players.
Yassuo3 (NA)
: Don't Perma Ban for Chat.
> To me this is not a ban able offense since players are given the option to mute each player both on their team and on the enemy team, or further more they can get rid of the entire chat feature itself in the settings box. The mute feature is a band-aid solution, and it's meant to prevent a player from suffering further ill-effects of chat misbehavior. It is not there to give players an exemption from [the rules that they agreed to at account creation.](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse#code-conduct) Whether you like it or not, everyone who makes an account on League of Legends signs up with the promise that they will not abuse the chat feature to misbehave and flame other players. Whether you like it or not, it is a punishable - and, if necessary - _bannable_ offense. Don't like the rules? Them's the 8r8ks. > I believe that every player who was permanently banned from the game for purposes only due to "toxic" in game chat behavior such as cursing and or trash talking teammates or opponents should have a second chance in this game since technically they have not actually broken any rules in terms of making the game enjoyable. I'm not sure where you're getting "technically" from, because they _did_ in fact break the rules, and they _did_ make the game unenjoyable for other players. If they didn't make the game unenjoyable, they wouldn't have been reported, and if they didn't break the rules, they wouldn't have been punished. I seriously recommend you read the [Terms of Use - Code of Conduct](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse#code-conduct) as well as the [Summoner's Code](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/featured/summoners-code), as both constitute the rules and behavioral guidelines you're expected to follow in League of Legends. > Since riot has the mute teammate feature players can simply mute their teammates who prefer to take out their aggression over the terms of typing in chat even though the chat box is suppose to be used for team work and planning, however we players know that this rarely occurs in lower elo and especially in higher elo. Players should not _have_ to mute other players. If you prefer to take out your aggression in-chat towards your teammates, then guess what; players can mute you, and they can also report you. You're not allowed to flame, period. The mute feature does not exempt you from that rule. Additionally; I'd really love to see some statistics about the usage of chat for coordination/teamwork. I doubt it's as low as some people like to sell it as. > Personally Riot should spend less time focusing on banning players for things such as toxic chat behavior for this doesn't cause any real harm unless these players are telling other players to kill themselves repetitively for this is a different style of aggression. Why do people assume that Riot is strictly _focusing_ on chat misbehavior? It's not like they have extremely limited resources and choose to funnel all of them towards chat misbehavior. The IFS - the system that handles chat misbehavior - is automated. So with the exception of cases pulled from the IFS for audit/manual review, they really aren't focusing on chat misbehavior any more than they're focusing on anything else. > Riot in fact should spend majority of their time banning the players who truly cause major issues in this game being those who win trade, and purposely throw games to help streamers out as well as boosters. Again; _you're assuming that they aren't trying._ Unfortunately, non-chat offenses aren't something they can just set the IFS to track and punish reliably. Chat offenses are easy; win-trading, trolling, intentional feeding, etc.? Those aren't half as easy. And as it were, simply saying "focus on this instead of chat" isn't going to make it any easier. > The video above is proof that this issue is apparent yet people prefer to say that those who are toxic in chat are the ones who ruin games. _Both_ are players who ruin games. It's not an either/or situation, and I don't think I've seen anyone even remotely suggest that wintraders/trolls/etc. don't ruin games while flamers do. _Both_ ruin games, _both_ are awful, and _both_ deserve punishment. > Riot please unban those who made mistakes in chat and focus on those who truly cause issues in this game. Again; they already _are_ focusing on gameplay misbehavior. And as for unbanning flamers; if they got permabanned, then they didn't just "make mistakes in chat". They made _a ton of mistakes_. _**Constantly.**_ Enough so that Riot had to permanently remove them from the game. At that point, that's not "making mistakes", that's deliberately flouting the rules. And those players who openly disrespected the rules, even after countless warnings, they're not getting unbanned. Period. If you can't be bothered to play by the rules, Riot can't be bothered to have you playing at all.
Xenoid (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=FlLwv4ih,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-12-01T01:43:29.952+0000) > > Why? What compelling reason is there to bring back a system that's old, outdated, unreliable, and slow to the point of punishing people months after the offense? Slow? Maybe. Old? Doesn't necessary means bad. Outdated? It's relative. Unreliable? If we speak about one-sided punishment of every person who said the "f-word" then yes. If we talk about looking at picture as a whole by real people - then no. In case you would like to defend automated punishing system let me remind you about recent YouTube and Google Account bans based on automated punishment system. Hundreds of thousands accounts got banned because system decided they are spammers. Here is a video about the incident by Mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWaz7ofl5wQ Spoiler: All accounts got unbanned and Google admitted they goofed.
> Slow? Maybe. It's not a "maybe", it's an "absolutely". Cases in the Tribunal, due to being reviewed by human beings, are naturally going to be umpteen times slower than those handled by a program designed to do the same job. > Old? Doesn't necessary means bad. In this case, it is. Because, as DuskDaUmbreon pointed out; it's not just old, it's outdated. > Outdated? It's relative. Absolutely. And with that being said, it is _absolutely outdated relative to the IFS._ The IFS does the job of the Tribunal faster, more efficiently, and with a margin of error that humans have a hard time coming close to. Meaning that, quite literally, Riot would be taking a _massive_ step backwards if they brought back the Tribunal in place of the IFS. Going backwards to worse systems is not a good thing. > Unreliable? If we speak about one-sided punishment of every person who said the "f-word" then yes. If we talk about looking at picture as a whole by real people - then no. The IFS has humans beat in terms of reliability, because it doesn't have an intrinsic bias. It simply reads the logs, interprets the text and determines whether or not the player broke the rules, and then punishes them. And like I said earlier, the margin of error is very, very small. And you pose "looking at the whole picture" as though the Tribunal resulted in any different outcomes than the IFS would. Fun fact; it didn't. Virtually all the cases that the IFS punishes now, the majority of the playerbase would have voted to punish during the Tribunal. The IFS was built off of the review practices and behavioral expectations that the community set forward in the Tribunal. So, humans being tasked to review a single player's behavior, it'd just be a less-reliable, less-quick version of the same thing we already have. Nothing new, just a whole lot worse. > In case you would like to defend automated punishing system let me remind you about recent YouTube and Google Account bans based on automated punishment system. Hundreds of thousands accounts got banned because system decided they are spammers. > > Here is a video about the incident by Mark: > > Spoiler: All accounts got unbanned and Google admitted they goofed. It's good that Google unbanned those accounts. I'd heard basically everything else about that whole fiasco save that part, so, thanks for the update. However, you're comparing apples to oranges here. If we look at the whole picture, you'd see a good number of differences between the Youtube stream-ban case and Riot's IFS. - Markiplier had no real say in whether or not the viewers would get punished. As far as I know, he didn't set up his stream with rules about "don't spam" or anything like that; the spambot acted on its own. Riot, however, they _have_ rules for their space. They built their punishment system _in accordance to those rules_. That already is a big difference; Riot _wants_ the rule enforcement, Markiplier didn't. - The two systems, as far as the case is concerned, are different. One was a spam bot; it sees something posted multiple times in quick succession, it punishes. The IFS is a lot more complicated, using machine-learning to read chat logs and determine intent - which is no mean feat when you consider just how steadily our language is evolving. - The punishments dealt are also completely different; the spambot didn't just revoke posting privileges on YouTube, it _banned_ people's Google accounts wholesale. The IFS, on the other hand, does not outright permaban players from the game unless it is an _exceptionally_ egregious offense. There's a punishment ladder, and players progress through that ladder based on the frequency and severity of their offenses. And spamming, as it were, is an exceptionally low-tier offense, meaning the first punishment for it will virtually always be a 10-game chat restriction, outside of exceptionally bad behavior (hate speech, encouragements of self-harm, death threats, etc.) So, if you're really going to try and raise an argument against an automated punishment system, you're really going to have to do better than using a case of a spambot for your argument.
: Tribunal
Why? What compelling reason is there to bring back a system that's old, outdated, unreliable, and slow to the point of punishing people months after the offense?
TechMom (NA)
: Reporting
> Why is it when people report falsely they don't get banned automatically? Because there's not really any good reason to punish someone just on account of false reports. False reports do not result in punishments outside of _exceptionally_ rare edge-cases, as the IFS can easily determine whether or not a report has merit through the review process that the report triggers. Besides that, let's assume for a moment that it _was_ a punishable offense to report players incorrectly. Someone happens to find someone who appears, by all rights, to be trolling, _but_, knowing that such behavior usually is difficult to catch, they might be opening themselves up to punishment if the IFS doesn't find that behavior to be within punishable bounds. Y'know what happens then? The player doesn't report the troll, not because they doubt whether or not the player actually was trolling, _but because they're afraid of getting punished themselves_. That's not a productive system. > Also, screenshots can be altered and a lot of the time when people post to public forums about others, it is falsified and doctored. Well, there are really only two places that players can theoretically post doctored screenshots; there's the Boards, wherein their post will get removed due to Naming & Shaming (and even if that rule wasn't in place, a fake screenshot being posted to the community wouldn't get them anywhere), and through a Support Ticket report, which _also_ wouldn't prove very useful, since Riot has access to the full, unedited logs of every in-client, in-game interaction, so they could easily check to see if the logs match the screenshot and...Boom. Nothing happens.
Cõmega (NA)
: Reported a guy who Trolled and verbally harassed me in game & champ select. Riot did something!
> edit; > > its insane how you guys complain so much on the boards are toxic players & trolls but then when i make a post about riot actually doing something to combat the issue i get hate >: Perhaps it's because you're being disingenuous and making a sarcastic comment about how _one_ player simply returned to misbehaving and trolling, and that Riot should have sprung for an immediate permanent ban? Your post basically reads: "Riot did something! But it didn't work this time, so it doesn't really count." It's good that a troll got punished, but your attitude about the situation frankly isn't stellar.
: Also Umbral, are you acting as an authorized Riot representative in this? Are you a paid employee?
> Also Umbral, are you acting as an authorized Riot representative in this? Are you a paid employee? I am not. As Kei143 explained, I'm simply another League player who has a reliable understanding of the Player Behavior systems insofar as one can have without any direct access to them. I'm not paid, I don't speak in any capacity for Riot, I just relay what information I know. And with that being said; > Take a look at the chat log. The _complete_ chat log. Review the game. I did nothing deserving the ban. As I'm just another player, I have no access to your chat log(s). If you want a peer review, you'll have to post the log(s) here yourself; they should appear when you launch the Client. Otherwise, if you want to appeal your punishment _directly_ with Riot, instead of having your chat logs peer-reviewed by the community, you'll have to file a [Support Ticket](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new).
: 1) How do you know it's from the leaver? 2) What were you banned for? 3) Honors are often given out trivially. Just because you got an honor doesn't mean you actually did anything.
Additionally; 4) Honors don't exempt you from punishment. You can be Honored and punished in the same match.
: How does talking help?
> I leave you with a question, what encouragement can be made for those who...still want to help? Here's a start. Stop doing this: > Some have a gift for it...Yet, there's a problem, not all of us have the gift... > > Unfortunately for most of us without the gift of ... nauseating kindness ... or without the patience to be so careful with words... > > ...don't have the forbearance of a saint... When you phrase it like this, you're making it that much harder for anyone to consider _trying_, because you're either making it sound nigh-on impossible, making it sound like an inhuman feat of self-control, that it'll make you sick to be decent to someone else, or that you have to be the umpteenth reincarnation of Buddha in order to not get punished. _Everyone_ can exhibit control over themselves. _Everyone_ can be patient with others, can phrase things without insult, can just be decent to other people. The more you make remarks like "needing the forbearance of a saint" or "nauseating kindness", the less you incentivize actually communicating with people. All of the examples you listed above as uses for chat are easy to do without issue; > Coordinating? "Yi, you solo baron while we keep their attention mid" "I'm going to split-push, defend base, but don't chase them if they come for me" "We need to group" > Trash talking the enemy? "That flash" "9 HP left" "Man I'm popular" > Seeking tips and advice? "Are my runes decent?" "What items should I build?" "What mechanics should I focus on?" > Understanding your ally's strategy and items? "What's the Lethality for?" "AS on Garen?" "That's an odd rune choice, how's it work?" > What about trying to prevent or stopping tilt? "Just breathe, we got this" "We scale harder, we just need to play safer" "We can take them next fight" If you're somehow getting punished for trying to communicate in any of the ways you described, then you need to reevaluate _how_ you're communicating, because clearly, there's an issue on your side if that becomes the case.
Raigar (NA)
: Any chance i can get my honor back playing tft? Cuz thats mostly all i reinstalled for
Unfortunately, due to TeamFight Tactics being a free-for-all gamemode, it's not possible to gain Honor through playing it. You'll have to play Summoner's Rift or ARAM to gain Honor, as it were. EDIT: Also, if you'd like a more prompt response, you can click the Reply button on the bottom of a person's comment to respond directly to them, which gives them a notification as well.
Zardo (NA)
: >Invalid reports won't do anything, so no matter how many reports you receive for intentional feeding, it's not going to have any effect - you aren't intentionally feeding, after all. Do you know how they determine if a report is valid, but not valid enough for a ban? Genuinely curious.
The best way to describe it is to refer to Kei143's description of the IFS' built-in leniency; > Think of it like a tension meter in rhythm games. The IFS doesn't have a hair trigger for most offenses - even flaming can sometimes be given a degree of leniency, provided it's a one-off offense. Committing an offense that breaks the ToU (and being reported for it accurately - that's pretty much the biggest part of it) marks that offense against your behavioral history. The two most common offenses that don't immediately merit a punishment are **Negative Attitude**, where players exhibit excessive negativity that ruins the team's morale or otherwise negatively impacts the game, with the biggest examples being defeatism (calling early GG's, ranting about how the game is lost, trying to coerce surrender votes) or passive-aggressive remarks, and **Verbal Abuse**, which of course constitutes direct insults and flaming. I think, probably the best way to understand what those sorts of low-key offenses are is to just browse punishment cases here for those that involve multiple games of chat logs. Games 2-3 in those cases typically have the least egregious offenses by the player, and in my experience are mostly negativity with the rare insult. ~~I'm not sure if this answered your question at all properly, and if I didn't, I sincerely apologize for failing in that regard.~~ EDIT: In re-reading this, yeahp, I did an absolutely terrible job of answering the question up 'til the last paragraph, and even then that's debatable. Basically, the only way we really know how Riot determines a report as valid without meriting a punishment is through inference. I'm sure there may have also been a Riot comment on the matter somewhere, but ultimately, the presence of multiple games' worth of chat logs is the biggest telling factor to it.
Raigar (NA)
: i stopped playing entirely until a few days ago
Ah. Then, that would explain remaining Honor 0. You ultimately only need to play games to progress, so sadly, taking the year off has left you pretty much without progress. At any rate, the above advice applies; play games, don't break the rules, be honorable, and honor others. If you've any other questions, do feel free to ask.
Raigar (NA)
: How to restore honor?
> The main problem is that I suck at league and people report me for feeding, sometimes even the other team reports me for feeding... Invalid reports won't do anything, so no matter how many reports you receive for intentional feeding, it's not going to have any effect - you aren't intentionally feeding, after all. > and please don't say git gud You'll do that on your own time at your own rate, but thankfully, individual skill has nothing to do with Honor Progression. > So what should I do? Well, the only things you really can do are as follows; - **Play often, and don't misbehave** - As long as you don't validate reports made against you (I.E, through negative communications such as defeatism, passive-aggressiveness, flaming), you'll gain Honor every match. - **Be positive, encourage your team** - While there's nothing to say that positive behavior will have any direct effect on your Honor Progression, there's always the indirect effect of positivity making players more likely to Honor you post-game, adding another modest increment to your progress. - **Always Honor someone, even if nobody stands out** - The biggest factor in Honor Progression is the Team Honor Bonus, which is earned when all five members of a team Honor someone post-game. Even if you can't _guarantee_ getting that team Honor bonus, the least you can do is contribute. That all aside, there are two questions that should probably be asked due to what you said at the beginning of the post; > i got a 14 day ban in january of this year and im still honor level 0... How often have you played since the 14-day ban, and do you usually respond to players who claim that they'll report you for intentionally feeding?
: Nightbringer Lee ? Stick to muay thai/god fist...
Alternatively, maybe the aesthetic appeal of the skin outweighs the awkward jank of his auto-attack animations? 1350RP skins don't typically come with a whole new swathe of animations, anyhow; that's usually reserved for 1820RP and up. Either way, regardless of whether or not Lee Sin needs a pass to his default animations, his Nightbringer skins both look whole hells of awesome, and some people (myself included) won't mind janky animations for the tradeoff of having an awesome skin.
: Chat ban from a single game. No slurs, one fbomb not directed at a player but at the situation.
> If calling out a troll is toxic, why not ban the troller and not those on the receiving end? Seems like you would have fewer bans and a happier player base. First of all; Riot has to determine whether or not the player in question _is_ actually a troll. The playerbase in general is notoriously unreliable at determining actual, legitimate trolling or intentionally feeding, and what some players will readily brand a troll is typically actually someone who's underperforming. Secondly; in order for Riot to even investigate whether or not the player in question was trolling, you'd need to report them. 90% of the time, people "call out trolls" (I.E, flame players) first before thinking of reporting, since you can only report _after_ a match. Simply banning trolls (regardless of how valid the ban is) wouldn't change that order of operations much. Third; _Riot does ban trolls._ You can act like they prioritize Chat punishments over trolling/intentional feeding all you want, but at the end of the day, trolls _do_ get punished; they're just difficult to accurately detect, partially due to how many ways one can troll and partially due to the community crying "wolf" over pugs. Fourth; At some point, you need to recognize that _you yourself_ are part of the problem. Y'know the Internet adage of "Don't feed the troll"? Well, "calling out a troll" is _feeding the troll_. If the player is in fact a troll, you're just validating their behavior and giving them more reason to troll. Rather than put the impetus on Riot to "just ban the trolls", you should recognize that you are a contributor to the problem too, and that if you think that someone is trolling, _do not talk to, of, or about them_. Don't even give them the time of day. Report them post-game, and don't fall for their shenanigans. > I don't understand my ban when I see homophobic and racist chat every other game. I have a game where I engage a troll and get a chat ban? You don't have to be homophobic or racist to get a punishment; in point of fact, homophobia and racism demand _escalated_ punishments, but there's still a whole breadth of other misbehavior that Riot doesn't allow in their game. And, no. Just because other people break the rules frequently (ignoring the likelihood that they get punished for it) does not give you liberty to break the rules yourself. > Is there something I missed in the chat logs that caused me to get banned? It's probable. If you want a peer review, you can submit your chat logs here and the community would be glad to weigh in on your behavior. Most people typically break the rules without even realizing it (such as with defeatism or passive-aggressive remarks), and it's not entirely uncommon for some people to be so inured to other misbehavior that they regard it as perfectly normal. > Or do the bans not take context into account... The IFS does not take context into account. It does not matter _why_ you flame or misbehave, if you break the rules, you get punished. You alone are responsible for your own actions.
: PERM BAN?!?!
Unfortunately for you, account sharing is against the [ToU](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse), and is punishable by a permanent suspension. If your friend wanted to play TFT, or League in general, they'd have made their own account. You can file a [Support Ticket](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new) if you want to try and appeal it, but like I said, account sharing is against the rules, so I can't imagine you'd get the punishment overturned.
: but... don't we all get a reset to honor 2 when the new season starts in February?
Pretty much what [KVbqbFsC8e](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/09HvI1qu-im-currently-honor-1-checkpoint-23-will-my-honor-level-progress-during-the-preseason?comment=0001000100000000) said; at the start of the new Season, everyone who was Honor Level 2 or higher has their Honor Level reset back down to 2, with an extra checkpoint for each level above 2. The reset does not, unfortunately, affect players who are Honor Level 0-1.
: I'm currently Honor 1 checkpoint 2/3, will my honor level progress during the preseason?
As long as you're playing games and not getting validly reported, your Honor will progress at any time of the year; including Pre-Season.
Y4hL (EUW)
: Honor 5 before season end
There's a chance, though you'd be cutting it real close. Just play plenty of games and make sure to Honor someone each time for that Team Honor Bonus, and don't put negativity into the chat. Keep at it, and here's hoping you get it.
Hwke94 (NA)
: Can you moderators make a rule about censorship?
If you want to discuss Moderator actions (such as thread/comment removals), you'll want to create a thread in _[Discuss the Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation)_, which is a subforum dedicated to Moderator action as well as guidance in using the Boards. _Player Behavior_ is more intended for discussing the player behavior systems (IFS, LeaverBuster, Honor) and individual player behavior. As an aside; > ...without a bunch of moderators spamming down vote... To my knowledge, most of the Moderators tend to err on withholding downvotes out of respect to discussion. I haven't seen any outstanding cases to the contrary, so I'd reckon if you're getting downvoted a lot, it's by other players who just disagree with you for one reason or another, not Moderators. > This is the place where you want people to ask for game play changes and yet it is highly restricted on what people can actually post. If you're talking about the _[Gameplay](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance)_ subforum, the biggest restrictions there to my knowledge are that you have to remain respectful and you have to actually present a discussable argument; you can't just call for "nerf x" or the like. There are of course more general guidelines to follow, but, as someone who never really looks at _Gameplay_, those are the two biggest rules I know apply.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=akYyOYBT,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-11-17T10:49:21.081+0000) > > The first comment in question aught to be removed. I'm not sure if it was incidentally overlooked when the thread was locked or what, but I do know that I reported both. Yes. Thus, my conclusion of "an odd removal." Wouldn't you agree with that assessment? > Whatever the case, commenting with just the RANT subforum link after someone else already did doesn't make it any better; in point of fact, it only makes it worse. Someone already went ahead with the disrespect, and then you decided to drive the nail in further with redundancy. That's not great, dude. Actually, I posted that reply before reading the other replies. > And the Moderator comment in question had much more to it than simply calling the post a rant; and even if it had exclusively been _this line:_ > > It would still have been far better than simply linking the RANT subforum with literally no other content. > > And the Moderator comment was more than just calling the OP's thread a rant. It was two whole paragraphs, and calling the thread a rant was the very _least_ of it. That just means that a bare link is not acceptable and we need copy-paste boilerplate. Okay! I can totally do more copy-paste. I've updated my PB copy-paste file to include that. > So, if you're drawing the conclusion that the removal of your comment was simply for calling the thread a rant, you're drawing the wrong conclusion. To that end, here's a relevant section from the [_Player Behavior Rules_.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/OjEUxbwH-player-behavior-rules-update) > > I italicized the most important line from the rule. It's also worth pointing out that simply posting links to the RANT subforum is functionally "low-effort taunts" as listed in the actionable offenses. The good intent we assume until proven otherwise by a Rioter is that they haven't been misrepresenting their behavior, such as e.g. claiming that the entirety of their logs was "good job, everyone" when they were actually spamming slurs. When the post itself is nothing but an insult and a dismissal, linking to RANT is a statement not about their in-game behavior, but about their post. And it's not wrong, nor is it a taunt. It's a pointer to the correct Board for their post, just like a mod would provide when they delete the thread. Same goes for Gameplay, too, which now has higher standards than it used to.
> Yes. Thus, my conclusion of "an odd removal." Wouldn't you agree with that assessment? No. The removal of your comment was not an odd one; the other same-such comment remaining is the odd part. > Actually, I posted that reply before reading the other replies. Then nix the insult to injury; incidental redundancy aside, it's still a zero-effort, zero-content dismissal. > That just means that a bare link is not acceptable and we need copy-paste boilerplate. Okay! I can totally do more copy-paste. I've updated my PB copy-paste file to include that. I'm going to be frank, though I've run the topic with you before; I personally loathe seeing copy-paste responses. I'm not going to grill you about it, since you and the Moderation Team came to a middle-ground about versatile response templates, but I'll still voice my displeasure. Set up your templates as you will, just try not to lean too hard on it. > The good intent we assume until proven otherwise by a Rioter is that they haven't been misrepresenting their behavior, such as e.g. claiming that the entirety of their logs was "good job, everyone" when they were actually spamming slurs. When the post itself is nothing but an insult and a dismissal, linking to RANT is a statement not about their in-game behavior, but about their post. This brings up the issue of "The Letter of the Rules" versus "The Spirit of the Rules", and in this case, the spirit of the rules is what's been broken. Yes, the description for the "Be Helpful" rule notes to assume good intent on the part of the poster regarding the self-assessment of their behavior, but that's not the important part of the rule. > It is important that our responses remain positive and come from a genuine desire to help them understand what happened and why. _Replies that are overly negative, dismissive or combative are not appropriate and may be removed._ This part here is what encapsulates the spirit of the rule, which is to engage posters and try to help them; not tell them off. > And it's not wrong, nor is it a taunt. It's a pointer to the correct Board for their post, just like a mod would provide when they delete the thread. Same goes for Gameplay, too, which now has higher standards than it used to. It is still overly dismissive and low-effort, especially when accompanied by no other statements. As for it not being wrong, that's something that's very frequently brought up and answered in PB itself, and the best analogy comes from Imperial Pandaa, IIRC; "Calling a fat person fat isn't wrong, but it's still an insulting thing to say." - roughly paraphrased, of course. Honestly speaking, if a post is so lacking in any meaningful content to discuss that your only response would be to link the RANT subforum and say nothing else, then it's probably best to just not comment at all and report the thread for **Incorrect Board**. If it's not worth your time to comment, don't.
: > [{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=akYyOYBT,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-11-17T10:25:02.012+0000) > > When the comment is quite literally just linking the OP to the RANT subforum, then it's not really adding anything to the discussion. It's needlessly curt, and frankly disrespectful. > > Imagine if all I did was respond to this thread with that same link. Y'know what that'd tell you? "This thread isn't worth my time to legitimately respond to, and you're better off going somewhere where the explicit goal is to yell ineffectually into the void". > > And that kind of implicit disrespect is definitely something I would consider worth removal - and generally, the Moderation Team seems to have the same idea, since this isn't the first time comments have been removed for doing nothing further than linking the RANT subforum. My post came after another post with the _exact_ same content (not removed), as well as a mod post calling the thread a rant (not removed).
> My post came after another post with the exact same content (not removed)... The first comment in question aught to be removed. I'm not sure if it was incidentally overlooked when the thread was locked or what, but I do know that I reported both. Whatever the case, commenting with just the RANT subforum link after someone else already did doesn't make it any better; in point of fact, it only makes it worse. Someone already went ahead with the disrespect, and then you decided to drive the nail in further with redundancy. That's not great, dude. > ...as well as a mod post calling the thread a rant (not removed). And the Moderator comment in question had much more to it than simply calling the post a rant; and even if it had exclusively been _this line:_ > If you want to actually discuss your ban and not just rant then please post your entire unedited chat logs here. It would still have been far better than simply linking the RANT subforum with literally no other content. And the Moderator comment was more than just calling the OP's thread a rant. It was two whole paragraphs, and calling the thread a rant was the very _least_ of it. So, if you're drawing the conclusion that the removal of your comment was simply for calling the thread a rant, you're drawing the wrong conclusion. To that end, here's a relevant section from the [_Player Behavior Rules_.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/OjEUxbwH-player-behavior-rules-update) > **Be Helpful** > > In general, all responses should assume good intent on the part of the poster, even if there is strong evidence to the contrary. The only exception is when Riot officially presents evidence of misbehavior. > > Most people who come to Player Behavior after a ban or chat restriction are frustrated, angry or upset. It is important that our responses remain positive and come from a genuine desire to help them understand what happened and why. _Replies that are overly negative, dismissive or combative are not appropriate and may be removed._ > > These include (but are not limited to): > > - Telling people you’re glad they’re banned. > - Low-effort taunts such as the Rammus “ok”. > - Saying the community is better off without them. I italicized the most important line from the rule. It's also worth pointing out that simply posting links to the RANT subforum is functionally "low-effort taunts" as listed in the actionable offenses.
: Well that was an odd removal
When the comment is quite literally just linking the OP to the RANT subforum, then it's not really adding anything to the discussion. It's needlessly curt, and frankly disrespectful. Imagine if all I did was respond to this thread with that same link. Y'know what that'd tell you? "This thread isn't worth my time to legitimately respond to, and you're better off going somewhere where the explicit goal is to yell ineffectually into the void". And that kind of implicit disrespect is definitely something I would consider worth removal - and generally, the Moderation Team seems to have the same idea, since this isn't the first time comments have been removed for doing nothing further than linking the RANT subforum.
: Last season they extended it and said people who climbed back to Honor 2 by the start of the next season would qualify. If they do that again, you should have no problem. https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/TGYs0hwO-2018-end-of-season-rewards-and-honor
> If they do that again, you should have no problem. As it were, they won't be doing that again. Keyru mentioned a good few times throughout the post that they won't be repeating the extended deadline; > ...so we’ll be offering a _**one-time only re-grant of in-game rewards**_ in February 2019. > > **To be clear:** we will be keeping the Honor eligibility in place for future ranked seasons, and going forward the results of this _one-time exception_ may be helpful if we decide to explore possible tweaks to the to the Honor 0 and 1 experience in the future. > > **Q: Does this mean Honor requirements are gone?** > > **A:** No, we'll still have Honor requirements next season. _This is a one-time deal._
Triple3T (NA)
: Riot needs a better way to report people who flame people for not ffing
> **Riot needs a better way to report people who flame people for not ffing** Not really. Just report them with the same category you'd use for any other flame; **Verbal Abuse**. The reason that people flame doesn't change anything, it'll still get reviewed and punished all the same.
: the player behavior section of the boards are a cesspit
> Welcome to the place where people have a legitimate reason to be unbanned... I'd honestly like to see a couple cases that fit that description. Very rarely does it ever even _seem_ probable that someone who got banned would have a legitimate reason to be unbanned, and even in those rare few cases, it very often turns up that their ban was properly placed and that they should stay banned. > ...and are just downvoted to hell... Complaining about downvotes does nothing. People have their own reasons for downvoting, and it usually resolves to disagreement or the OP in question being disagreeable. Regardless, downvotes don't matter. > ...by [players] who use retrospect as a way of making their point. I don't understand what you mean by this. Are we just not supposed to judge the players actions that led to the punishment? > I mean, alot of the people here trying to get unbanned are actually toxic... This seems to run completely counter to your opening statement. So people have a legitimate reason to be unbanned...But a lot of them actually don't? > ...but most the chat logs are from the typical regular league game. Define "typical" and "regular". > trolls and feeders are everywhere... Legitimate trolls and intentional feeders are rare, despite what you may think. Unless you're running with a premade who go out of their way to troll and int-feed, that kind of behavior isn't actually typical. What _is_ typical, however, is people crying "wolf" over a pug. Consider, perhaps, that the people you're calling trolls and intentional feeders aren't actually that - and that they may well just be suffering an off-game. We all have them. > ...and when you are on a hard grind, of course you will be enfuriated. Getting angry is no excuse for breaking the rules. If you know you're getting angry, _take breaks_. People have ample tools to prevent themselves from going overboard and breaking the rules, if you don't use them, that's _your fault_. > ...its so undermining to say "lol just report dont be mad"... Only a rare few people will be so unhelpful as to say "don't be mad". The majority of us _understand_ anger, and we know it's not something that can be readily controlled, but that still doesn't excuse breaking the rules. > ...because the game itself instigates toxicity by encouraging competitiveness... Seriously, this whole rigmarole? No, the game does not instigate or encourage toxicity in its design. If you're getting super frustrated in League, the odds are high that its _your own playing habits_ and _your own nature_ that's causing you to get frustrated, _not the game_. Trying to deflect the problem and blame the game isn't going to help you in any respect. > ...who are simply mad that their teammate is a chimpanzee. Remember what I said about "players crying 'wolf' over pugs"? This is pretty much exactly that. You're getting mad because a teammate is underperforming, so you'll do anything to vilify them, calling them a troll, an intentional feeder, acting like they're out to sabotage your game... I'm using "you" in the figurative sense, of course, but regardless, the point stands. And, I will repeat what I said earlier: **_If you're getting angry, take breaks._** Continuing to play while angry is only likely to make that anger build up, and then it'll reach that tipping point, and you'll explode and break the rules and get yourself punished. > its so easy to judge someone else for getting banned when you dont put yourself in their shoes and just look back in retrospect criticizing their every decision. It's also easy to ignore that **we play the same game. We deal with the same situations, and we understand the frustration.** It's easy to ignore the fact that, despite being forum-goers and having this detached, unbiased perspective that fundamentally seems opposed to anyone who gets punished, _we don't have these fundamentally different experiences._ We deal with trolls, we deal with intentional feeders, we deal with bad games and players who are having bad games. We deal with unwinnable matches, frustrating match-ups, not getting our roles, our pick intents, everything. Don't act like we've never run into a troll or experienced the frustration of getting demoted straight after a hard climb up to a promo series. We play the same freakin' game.
: I talked to riot and they said I have to bring it to the boards. NEVER DID I GET A MESSAGE SAYING THE DEMOTION OF MY HONOR. How am i supposed to know how honorable must I be to have progression? Perhaps I am mildely toxic but the failure of riot in telling me so is unfair. Furthermore, I really have played so many games! Check my account, the game count is definetely in the hundreds.
> NEVER DID I GET A MESSAGE SAYING THE DEMOTION OF MY HONOR. Your Honor gets stripped when you receive a punishment, such as your 25-game Chat Restriction. I haven't myself been punished, but I'm 90% sure they straight-up tell you that the punishment also incurs an Honor penalty. > How am i supposed to know how honorable must I be to have progression? Well, the chat logs associated with your chat restriction would've been a good start. The chat you got punished for is bound to be chat you should avoid. Beyond that, excessive negativity, defeatism, passive-aggressive remarks, detrimental arguing, etc. are other behaviors you should avoid. > Perhaps I am mildely toxic but the failure of riot in telling me so is unfair. I am inclined to agree that the Honor System not telling you that you're not progressing due to continued misbehavior is definitely an issue, however it's a rough line to tread to try and maintain clarity while also preventing players from trying to game the system. I'm not sure what I'd really like to see in regards to that for the Honor system, beyond possibly an infrequent pop-up message explaining vaguely that your behavior is still below average and that you're not progressing in Honor, but that could be misconstrued to some degree, so I'm not even 100% on it. Either way, yeah, I'm largely in agreement on this. I'd say a good 65% of the issue lies with no clear feedback being given, though the other 35% is your own behavior and seemingly not noticing that you weren't progressing. > Furthermore, I really have played so many games! Check my account, the game count is definetely in the hundreds. Those hundreds of games don't really count if you're still misbehaving in them. Honor is, after all, related to your behavior and not how frequently you play League. How do you normally act and react in your matches? Knowing how you chat could help in pointing out what behaviors are holding you back from Honor progress.
: Low Honor level no ranked rewards
If you're still Honor Level 0 after 6 months of playing since your 25-game CR, then odds are high that you're still behaving poorly - just not poorly enough to merit a punishment outright. Consider that there may well still be some issues in your communication with other players; 'cause frankly, there's no way you'd be stuck at Honor Level 0 for 6 months if you had reformed. > How is this fair? Ranked play is meant to be a more competitive experience than Normals, and with that competition comes the expectation of good sportsmanship. If you're not sportsmanlike, then you should not be entitled to competitive rewards. > Being honor 2 doesn't mean I have to be AMAZING each game but I am for sure not toxic anymore at all. If you were not toxic, and did not break the rules, you would not still be Honor Level 0. Perhaps you mistakenly believe that certain negative behaviors or examples of poor sportsmanship are fine, which isn't an uncommon mistake, but regardless, the fact remains: you've not been honorable enough to regain Honor. > Can riot please give me a ranked reward for the end of this season? Honor Level 2 has been explicitly stated to be the prerequisite for End-of-Season rewards both at the beginning and here at the tail-end of the year. They're not going to do another extended cutoff date like 2018, so if you're not Honor Level 2 by the 19th, then, hate to be the bearer of bad news, but no, they're not going to give you rewards you don't qualify for.
: Why is it even if you never actually say anything toxic people can still 9x you successfully?
[9x-reporting isn't a thing.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/9VrUtrJo-being-solo-and-having-a-team-report?comment=0000000000020000000000000000) It doesn't matter if you're reported only one time or by every other player in the match, all reporting does is trigger a review, and the review process does not care how many reports are filed. If you got chat restricted, then the odds are high that you _did_ break the rules, even if you yourself do not think that you did. You should submit your chat logs for peer review, because doubtless, you had to have said _something_ to merit a chat restriction - the IFS will never punish _you_ for something someone else did.
Atreju (EUW)
: Make banning teams pick reportable already
It's not a bannable offense because bans take priority over picks; specifically; if a player does not wish to play against a Champion (due to said Champion being particularly strong, a hard counter, or having mechanics that frustrate them) or with a Champion (due to not synergizing well, not enjoying the playstyle, the Champion is too new, or they simply don't want to risk the enemy getting them first), it is their right to use their ban to remove that Champion from the pool for that specific match. Does this still leave the possibility for players to maliciously ban other players' Champions? Unfortunately, yes. But, such behavior _does_ get punished when proven to be with the intent to upset another player or otherwise serve a detriment to the team. And, ultimately, Riot designed the Draft Pick system so as to allow players to, in some small way, dictate their game. The rare case of maliciously banning other players' pick intents is unfortunately the price that has to be paid for overall satisfaction and game agency.
: obviously its stupid to think riot would allow a system that would ban players if they just get mass reported in a game where every game someone cries for reports. all i said was there isnt much difference between posting a code line (even IF the code would work if you insert it) and just saying yeah our report did this and that.
> all i said was there isnt much difference between posting a code line and just saying yeah our report did this and that. Like I said. Tantram presented all the necessary information front-and-center. He says that more reports != greater weight, and provides a line of code that follows that same logic in design. The OP here provides vague information at best, that can't be looked at beyond taking whatever he says at face-value. He doesn't legitimately have any proof that _that_ specific player got punished (because the IFR doesn't tell you _who_ got punished, just that someone _did_ get punished), they only vaguely suggest that the player in question wasn't breaking the rules (which is doubtful at best; odds are high that he and his 4-man premade flamed or trolled the player to elicit a reaction, or something to a similar effect), and the only detail that _can_ be taken at face-value isn't even roughly verifiable on its own, being the 4-man report. Even _assuming_ that the story has any truth to it, it comes into question, _how_ did the player in question behave? Did the 4-man premade flamebait or something similar? Was the IFR strictly pertaining to the player in question, or did it pop up for another match entirely? Tantram provided a line of code that you can look at and understand, and to any small degree, verify. The OP is giving a story that favors their own narrative that _can't_ be verified and they're saying "look, trust me, it happened". If there isn't much difference there, then I don't know what to say.
Show more

Umbral Regent

Level 171 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion