Rioter Comments
: I've been perma banned for two years, and I just want to say something.
Actually, I think the problem with the game is that it isn't competitive enough. That's why you can't try new things, because the design philosophy has become about shoe-horning champions into specific roles, creating specific items for specific champions and enforcing the Meta. It never used to be about that, so in any given patch you had maybe 4 or 5 completely overpowered things to choose from which each had glaring weaknesses to be exploited if you knew how. Now it's just pick the champ that's going to do the most upfront burst, or when that doesn't work, pick the champs with the most survivability or whatever the current meta-de-jour happens to be. The other problem is the way they match players in ranked. They explicitly said that their goal in creating a match making system was to fix every game so that you had a roughly 50/50 chance of winning. That's why when you go on a big winning streak your team mates get WORSE not better. Because the algorithm actively tries to slap you back down. It's by design. It's an absolute travesty. That's the real reason that it doesn't feel like you can solo carry any more. They made the change when they introduced Roll picking, which I was completely against too, by the way, yet another social aspect of the game that everyone wanted a top down solution for. I told you it wouldn't go well and now here we are. So now, you are actually forced to conform to the meta because the game forces you into a role and you can be banned for not following it. I already quit this stupid game, it hasn't been good for 5 years. This is nothing new, I was just addicted. I stopped and it's better now. I'm here cause Riot went all SJW and I don't want that in any game, even one that I think is garbage, because it's an infectious disease that will spread through other games if it isn't quarantined and dealt with.
: Women tend to leave male-dominated fields, even if they start in them. This is due to harassment and pressure from their colleagues. [Here is one source. ](https://nest.latrobe/83-of-women-leave-stem/) [Here is another.](https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/26/women-leaving-stem-depression/) [Here is another one.](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-girls-leave-stem-and-what-you-can-do-about-it_us_59ff876ee4b076eaaae270c2) [Here is the wikipedia page for women in gaming from which you can get to the citations and sources at the bottom.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_video_games) I don't know how to feel when I see the same arguments rehashed over and over again even though they've been debunked. When I see people say things like "women just aren't interested" and "there are no female gamers" it alienates first and foremost the women in the gaming industry right now, and the ones who want to get into it right now. Even if there is a smaller percentage, it is absolutely not okay to act like women have no interest in it at all. They do, and they will continue to. It is a very difficult thing to overcome challenges in your field. We should not shrug off their struggles by saying "maybe women just aren't as into it as men." As for the fight to get men into female-dominated fields? It's there. There are male makeup models and male nurses. However, they often get harassed out too. Usually by other men who consider them not manly enough. [Here is a source. ](https://www.nursingtimes.net/why-are-there-so-few-men-in-nursing/849269.article) This is a well-documented phenomenon with many studies to back it up.
> [{quoted}](name=Hanzo Mid,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2bZ5VH01,comment-id=0028,timestamp=2018-09-06T21:42:27.408+0000) > > Women tend to leave male-dominated fields, even if they start in them. This is due to harassment and pressure from their colleagues. [Here is one source. ](https://nest.latrobe/83-of-women-leave-stem/) [Here is another.](https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/26/women-leaving-stem-depression/) [Here is another one.](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-girls-leave-stem-and-what-you-can-do-about-it_us_59ff876ee4b076eaaae270c2) [Here is the wikipedia page for women in gaming from which you can get to the citations and sources at the bottom.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_video_games) > > I don't know how to feel when I see the same arguments rehashed over and over again even though they've been debunked. > > When I see people say things like "women just aren't interested" and "there are no female gamers" it alienates first and foremost the women in the gaming industry right now, and the ones who want to get into it right now. Even if there is a smaller percentage, it is absolutely not okay to act like women have no interest in it at all. They do, and they will continue to. It is a very difficult thing to overcome challenges in your field. We should not shrug off their struggles by saying "maybe women just aren't as into it as men." > > As for the fight to get men into female-dominated fields? It's there. There are male makeup models and male nurses. However, they often get harassed out too. Usually by other men who consider them not manly enough. [Here is a source. ](https://www.nursingtimes.net/why-are-there-so-few-men-in-nursing/849269.article) > > This is a well-documented phenomenon with many studies to back it up. But, you see, the thing about that is, women aren't as interested. Full stop. It's called statistics. Statistics don't care about your feelings, just like I don't. If you're Riot and you're going to alienate all the people playing your game in favor of people who, as a group, will never be interested in your game, you're being fucking stupid. Which is what they're doing.
: Any Tips for a returning player from 2014?
> [{quoted}](name=Zyntherius,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=18PsNPFV,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-09-06T17:51:45.993+0000) > > One major thing ive noticed.. New map.. New layout.. Also.. new levels?! Why have we gone past lvl 30 being the max? > > How much has jungling changed? i've only been playing arams to get back into the hang of things but it doesn't compete to seeing whats changed. My advice? Don't. League is terrible and has been for a long time, better to find another game.
: I'm perfectly fine with a women's only room.
Oh well, better let me in, I Identify as an attack helicopter.
: The PAX/Tweet sexist fiasco won't have any actual consequence for RIOT
Well, eventually what will happen is that Riot will funnel more and more of their resources into being ideologically pure and they will devote less and less time to actually providing the services people pay them for, which will lead to a mass exodus and it's pointless trying to get more women to play league because except for the pretty skins, League has absolutely nothing of interest to girls. It doesn't have a story, it's hyper competitive and it requires a high degree of reaction and tireless practice to master. That's the reason girls don't like this game and I say girls in the very broadest sense of the word. There are obviously gamer girls out there who enjoy all those things, but they are a radical minority, hence the dearth of females who play this game. I also guarantee you that about 90% of the girls who DO play are here because of the easy access to men. I guess my point being, it doesn't matter how much they try to appease the whamens, you won't ever get them playing this game without changing into something fundamentally different from what it is, so you lose out no matter what. And the best part is... I fucking called it when they introduced the tribunal. I knew this is where it would end up and now you have it, all because you wanted to shut people up in chat for being mean. Well this is what you get snowflakes. Good fucking riddance.
: My only question now, about Riots sexism and hypocrisy, is will the players actually do anything?
I mean, I already quit, but that's because the game is shit and LCS is fucking boring now. However, I believe that most of the reason that it's shit has to do with Riot's embrace of Feminist Ideological nonsense so I suppose it's at the very least related.
: PSA: Riot never told you to kill yourselves. Don't make this something it isn't.
I'll say this again and again. This is not about Riot Condoning suicide, it is the players coming to the realization that Riot is infested with SJWs and that the company is OK with this, that they share their Social Justice agenda. The evidence has been pilling up for years but it hasn't been so blatant it couldn't be reasonably explained away until this week. That's what's going on here. And I'm sorry to say for everyone that still likes this piece of shit game, it's too late. You waited too long, the rot goes too deep now. You should have cut it out when they started censoring chat, but you didn't and now it's too late. Game over man, Game over. #roastingmarshmallows
: I can't believe I genuinely wanted to work for you guys when I was younger
Well, the thing is, this is what they've always been, they just let you see it this time. This is what happens when you let censorship into your organization and they have always been very pro censorship.
: I don't understand the outrage
Well, because it isn't the garbage comment people are fixated on. I know it looks like that from a surface level of analysis and I'm sure for most they don't understand why they are concerned to the degree to which they are, but it's actually symptomatic of an existential threat to the game. At some level, everyone commenting on this situation sees that, even if they couldn't articulate how they see it or what exactly that existential threat is, but that's the source of the outrage, I think. More over, I think it's justified and because I'm working on increasing my rhetorical acumen, I'll see if I can lay out to you why I think it's a justified concern. Riot's actions have indicated to the concerned public a shift in their values which is incongruous with the values of the community. The community at large, I would say, values primarily the betterment of the gaming experience to some kind of theoretical optimal. This is a very good value, because it is unattainable yet can be moved towards. Riot's recent actions however, seem not to be in line with this goal, but rather towards some kind of social engineering and gender equality nonsense and it IS nonsense for a couple of reasons. 1) Core gamers are overwhelmingly men. This is indisputable and you don't have to look hard at the scientific data on the personality differences between the sexes to understand why that's the case but I'll just give you a couple. Men are on average more aggressive and more competitive and they have more of a tendency to be interested in things as opposed to people. You push both of those tendencies to the extremes of the distributions and it explains why you see men overwhelmingly represented in aggressive, competitive activities. Such as League of Legends. 2) Programmers and engineers are also OVERWHELMINGLY men for exactly the same reasons. Both of these factors explains the disparity you see in the staffing at Riot as well as the player base with a far greater accuracy than any kind of "toxic environment for women". The fact is very clear. This is a male dominated activity at every level of analysis by BIOLOGICAL design. Now, that said, MAYBE it's possible to change that. Maybe, if it were possible, it might even be better for everyone if it were to be changed. I'm not here to make any kind of judgement on that. However, what it will self evidently NOT be is easy or cheap because it is attempting to re-order the very fabric of reality. And if that's Riot's new prime Value; to attempt to re-order the very biological tendencies which make us human in the name of some kind of vaunted "equality" then the probability that they will simultaneously be able to continue to make the best possible gaming experience is ZERO. Now then. Does that explain it to you?
: You know for a fact Daniel Z Klein is fishing for browny points
That's true, being a male feminist is synonymous with being a serial molester.
Phoenixdust (EUNE)
: "they seem bent on some kind of malicious social constructivist experiment who have fooled the participants to pay them for the experience of being a lab rat" - I could not agree more. The thing is that i really enjoy watching this whole "experiment", it's kind of interesting. Of course it is easy to say, when i didn't pay.
> [{quoted}](name=Phoenixdust,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=MuLf3KYP,comment-id=000300000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-06T15:28:22.099+0000) > > "they seem bent on some kind of malicious social constructivist experiment who have fooled the participants to pay them for the experience of being a lab rat" - I could not agree more. The thing is that i really enjoy watching this whole "experiment", it's kind of interesting. Of course it is easy to say, when i didn't pay. Well, I didn't pay either. Not since they banned my first account. I saw the writing on the wall back in 2008 but they had (a very small amount) of my money before I even knew what the tribunal was. Now, I'm just cackling with laughter as the whole edifice comes toppling down. Resentment? Sour grapes? Maybe. I'm fine with that. Muahahahahaha...
: Reminder: Why Riot Needs to be Held Accountable
Well, this is all very true and everything, but as I've said many times before today (Because I find it fucking hilarious) this is actually what players wanted. This all stems inevitably from the decisions Riot made vis-a-vis players in game chat. They took the line that certain speech was unacceptable and that to police said speech they were going to bring in experts. The community agreed to it then and that's when you doomed Riot to this. What experts did you think they would bring in? Well, I'll tell you who they got. They got people with gender studies degrees and other post modernist degrees. You are now seeing the result. Now, the thing is, I don't actually blame Riot for this because they're all a bunch of Nerds. They don't know how to handle social matters, which is why they didn't have the first clue what to do about in game harassment. They didn't anticipate it because that was never their focus, but they looked at the feedback and you idiots were just clamoring for them to do SOMETHING about it. So it's YOUR fault. You are now reaping the benefits of the stupid decisions you all made back in 2008. Well good fucking riddance. I'll be over here eating popcorn, watching the explosions.
Phoenixdust (EUNE)
: No, it obviously does not, and from the company's viewpoint this was a mistake from the guy. YET this person still might be a very valuable employee (still making more profit to the company, than they lost because of this tweet). It's like when you accidentally cut off one of your fingers, you accept it as a loss, you would not cut off your whole arm, just because it is less valuable now.
> [{quoted}](name=Phoenixdust,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=MuLf3KYP,comment-id=0003000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-06T15:08:14.625+0000) > > No, it obviously does not, and from the company's viewpoint this was a mistake from the guy. YET this person still might be a very valuable employee (still making more profit to the company, than they lost because of this tweet). > > It's like when you accidentally cut off one of your fingers, you accept it as a loss, you would not cut off your whole arm, just because it is less valuable now. That's true, it could very well be the case that he performs some kind of service that is valuable which would make any kind of reprimand difficult. But to simply do nothing about it seems at the very least careless, which is concerning to anyone invested in the continuation of the company, which is every player of the game. Because League isn't a product you buy, it's a service that you rent and they have a monopoly on that service. So if the company providing the service becomes unsustainable, you can't continue to rent it. What I'm saying, is that Riot seems to be at the very least careless and dishonest in their handling of this situation and at the extreme, they seem bent on some kind of malicious social constructivist experiment who have fooled the participants to pay them for the experience of being a lab rat.
Phoenixdust (EUNE)
: "Those tweets were clearly against Riot's terms of service and any player making such statements would, under the terms of service, have to face punishment for those statements." - Yes, this was against Rito's TOS, but not against Twitter's. This happened on Twitter, so nobody broke anything. "The first must obviously be financial." - The first, and last one is financial. The only goal is financial. They made the "anti toxic" system, because players felt bad in the game, and left Lol because of it, in the end resulting in a money loss. The IFS and chat ban systems are as profit oriented as the game is. "But there is no reasonable way that insulting and antagonizing 90% of your player base on social media fits in with that value. None at all." - This guy probably is a valuable employee for Rito, at the moment they start losing more money on him, than he makes for the company, they will fire him. That's why only boycotting purchases can work (or at least threatening with it), if these people want to achieve their goal. "So this brings into question Riot's core values." - Make money. This is all :D
> [{quoted}](name=Phoenixdust,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=MuLf3KYP,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2018-09-06T15:04:44.336+0000) > > "Those tweets were clearly against Riot's terms of service and any player making such statements would, under the terms of service, have to face punishment for those statements." - Yes, this was against Rito's TOS, but not against Twitter's. This happened on Twitter, so nobody broke anything. > > "The first must obviously be financial." - The first, and last one is financial. The only goal is financial. They probably made the "anti toxic" system, because players felt bad in the game, and left Lol because of it, in the end resulting in a money loss. The IFS and chat ban systems are as profit oriented as the game is. > > "But there is no reasonable way that insulting and antagonizing 90% of your player base on social media fits in with that value. None at all." - This guy probably is a valuable employee for Rito, at the moment they start losing more money on him, than he makes for the company, they will fire him. That's why only boycotting purchases can work (or at least threatening with it), if these people want to achieve their goal. > > "So this brings into question Riot's core values." - Make money. This is all :D Well, also, come to that, insulting 90% of your customers doesn't even fit into their supposed first value does it?
Phoenixdust (EUNE)
: Response to the Rito employee scandal (can't write name :D )
If I can offer my analysis of the situation. I don't actually think people are offended by the tweets of a singular Riot employee. They are angry at what Riot's response to those tweets implies about the values Riot is operating under. First, there is the whole hypocrisy angle. Those tweets were clearly against Riot's terms of service and any player making such statements would, under the terms of service, have to face punishment for those statements. There is no evidence of Riot taking punitive actions, so it cannot be that the company actually cares about those values. And so why do they make their players adhere to them if they don't hold themselves accountable to the same measure. This question of values is very important, because this hypocrisy suggests that Riot's value system is flawed. To the minds of a player, the company should have 2 prime values. The first must obviously be financial. The company is beholden to make money for it's investors and employees or it cannot sustain it's self. This much is obvious, this much is acceptable. But the second, at least to the minds of players SHOULD be, to provide the best possible product. You could make the argument, I suppose, that maintaining decorum in game increases the quality of the product. I suppose that's believably congruent with making a better game as the community is inextricably linked to the game. But there is no reasonable way that insulting and antagonizing 90% of your player base on social media fits in with that value. None at all. So this brings into question Riot's core values. Because if their penultimate value ISN'T to make the best game possible, then we actually have identified an existential threat to the very game in question. Does that makes sense?
: > [{quoted}](name=UnwardiI,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=iZ7avJgE,comment-id=00050000000000010001,timestamp=2018-09-06T14:29:31.088+0000) > > Yeah, well where was the community outcry when Riot decided they were going to police the tone and content of our in-game chat hmm? Where was the outcry then? I'll tell you, it was this guy right here and nobody fucking else. So now you get to reap the benefits of letting social justice into your game. You wanted this. You invited this. You deserve what you get. > > (Not you specifically, I'm of course speaking to the community in general.) Moderated chat, no matter how bullshit it got, was not the conception of social justice politics in Riot. This was a recent introduction and they're paying the price.
> [{quoted}](name=WomboComboDombo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=iZ7avJgE,comment-id=000500000000000100010000,timestamp=2018-09-06T14:31:54.928+0000) > > Moderated chat, no matter how bullshit it got, was not the conception of social justice politics in Riot. This was a recent introduction and they're paying the price. I'm not talking about moderated chat on the boards. I'm talking about the tribunal system of punishment where the content of your in-game chat would be looked at by community members and Rioters and on the basis of what you said they could suspend your account. This is and always was a completely pointless thing to do because a player could simply make a new account and continue on with the exact same behavior. They knew that, so why did they do it? Probably because it would encourage a player who was banned to buy more boosts to get their levels and runes back. A better solution would have been an immediate consequence to calculable behavior. So if your behavior looked like obvious feeding or spouting obscenities, you get hit with a 30 minute wait time on your next game to cool down, do it again and it's tripled. This means if you're in the mood to ruin games, you simply can't do it too often. Even have multiple accounts, the time required to login would slow you down. Instead, they thought the could regulate the content of people's speech by making it illegal to say certain things. This is called social engineering and it doesn't work. It has been tried over and over in many many settings and it just doesn't work. But the community were too snowflakey and demanded Riot do something about this problem instead of toughening up and taking it on the chin. And guess what. You got exactly what you asked for. Good Riddance.
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=WomboComboDombo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=iZ7avJgE,comment-id=0005000000000001,timestamp=2018-09-06T14:24:35.391+0000) > > People like Dancing Foxx have such low self esteem and they're used to getting shit on all the time already, so they don't understand the situation like the majority of the community does. Let him be surprised I guess lmao. Yeah, well where was the community outcry when Riot decided they were going to police the tone and content of our in-game chat hmm? Where was the outcry then? I'll tell you, it was this guy right here and nobody fucking else. So now you get to reap the benefits of letting social justice into your game. You wanted this. You invited this. You deserve what you get. (Not you specifically, I'm of course speaking to the community in general.)
: > [{quoted}](name=UnwardiI,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=iZ7avJgE,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-09-06T14:19:57.203+0000) > > What I don't think you understand dear poster, is that they are discussing the game. > > They are discussing an existential threat to the game, thought most don't quite realize it yet. > > The fact is this, if Riot doesn't about face immediately and purge it's ranks of the social justice insurgency which they have allowed into their HR department, then the company will go broke and the game will be no more because it will be impossible for them to retain the talent required to do a good job, the quality of the game will suffer drastically and they will be unable to make any appropriate decisions concerning the game or financing or ANYTHING due to the massive weight of the social justice bullshit weighing them down. > > Just because you don't see the threat of that, doesn't mean it isn't there. > > Now, me, I'll be here laughing, because I warned you all this would happen when they started policing language in chat back in 2008, but y'all didn't listen. Now the chickens have come home to roost and I'm just laughing because frankly, it's funny how hard you all suck. > > Burn baby, Burn. I'll be toasting marshmallows. Thanks. This post was good for a laugh, too.
> [{quoted}](name=Dancing Foxx,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=iZ7avJgE,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2018-09-06T14:20:44.484+0000) > > Thanks. This post was good for a laugh, too. You don't have to believe me. Just remember when it happens that you heard it here first.
: Riot - enough is enough!
What I don't think you understand dear poster, is that they are discussing the game. They are discussing an existential threat to the game, thought most don't quite realize it yet. The fact is this, if Riot doesn't about face immediately and purge it's ranks of the social justice insurgency which they have allowed into their HR department, then the company will go broke and the game will be no more because it will be impossible for them to retain the talent required to do a good job, the quality of the game will suffer drastically and they will be unable to make any appropriate decisions concerning the game or financing or ANYTHING due to the massive weight of the social justice bullshit weighing them down. Just because you don't see the threat of that, doesn't mean it isn't there. Now, me, I'll be here laughing, because I warned you all this would happen when they started policing language in chat back in 2008, but y'all didn't listen. Now the chickens have come home to roost and I'm just laughing because frankly, it's funny how hard you all suck. Burn baby, Burn. I'll be toasting marshmallows.
feelihipo (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=UnwardiI,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qR1n7lLF,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-09-05T20:37:56.848+0000) > > Very good. > > Now if you believe that, give 10% of your earnings to a woman to equalize the gender pay gap. > > Now that you've done that, give your job to a woman because you only have it due to un-earned male privilege and take a less senior position. If a Government were to take 5% of the paycheck of every man in order to boost the paycheck of every woman by 5% so they would both receive equal pay, _that would be the goddamned right thing to do._ This isn't about losing what's *rightfully* yours, it's about losing privilege.
> [{quoted}](name=feelihipo,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qR1n7lLF,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-09-05T20:39:54.860+0000) > > If a Government were to take 5% of the paycheck of every man in order to boost the paycheck of every woman by 5% so they would both receive equal pay, _that would be the goddamned right thing to do._ > This isn't about losing what's *rightfully* yours, it's about losing privilege. Ok. So now you've put into precedent the idea that the government can garnish your wages based on your immutable biological characteristics. Doesn't that sound a bit, oh, I don't know, systemically sexist to you?
feelihipo (EUW)
: I fully support what Riot did with Pax.
Very good. Now if you believe that, give 10% of your earnings to a woman to equalize the gender pay gap. Now that you've done that, give your job to a woman because you only have it due to un-earned male privilege and take a less senior position.
ZER0 2 (NA)
: You guys are only proving danielzklein right you know.
There's a very good reason why nobody spoke up about Riot's practices being allegedly sexist. 1) because those claims were largely unfounded. In most people's estimation, causing a woman offence does not constitute sexism. Having a work environment that doesn't cater to the needs of women is, in-fact called being egalitarian. 2) because it doesn't have anything to do about making a good video game which is literally the only thing that 95% of the people who play the game care about. The reason they get mad when Riot does something overtly sexist and virtue signally like, oh, refusing to let 90% of their fan base in on a session, is because it demonstrates the company is paying lip service to a pathologically destructive ideology known as Social Justice. There is a 1-1 correlation between game companies who let social justice into their decision making process and games companies who's games tank and then go broke. That's why people care. But not me, because I fucking called it 8 years ago and this is what you fucking deserve.
: WHat excatly did riot do? im late to the party
They Drank the feminist Coolaid. But hey, I tried to warn y'all about it when they started banning people for what they said in chat, but you all thought that's what you wanted so I have 0 sympathy for you.
: Reminder that sexism goes both ways
: Reminder that sexism goes both ways
Ah yes, but the problem of sexism will certainly be alleviated by the addition of yet more sexism!
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: because he is not a tank? he has one shield ability that isn't even that good. That does not make him a tank. He is a diver, a fighter, bruiser. Whatever you want to call him but a tank he is not. He is the farthest thing from a tank possible. He can build like one but that doesn't make him one
> [{quoted}](name=ZephyrDrake,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Yr8Q6A28,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-01-12T10:43:10.717+0000) > > because he is not a tank? he has one shield ability that isn't even that good. That does not make him a tank. He is a diver, a fighter, bruiser. Whatever you want to call him but a tank he is not. He is the farthest thing from a tank possible. He can build like one but that doesn't make him one No. He IS a tank. Everything about his theming is tank. He is classified as a tank in the character list. Look it up. His play style SHOULD be that of a tank. It just isn't because he isn't given a reason to be one.
Rioter Comments
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: > I don't care what my jungler thinks of me as a person, I want them to stop being awful. And this is why, again, you suck at communication. You do, in fact, suck so hard at communication that it starts inconveniencing others. If I try to befriend people by farting them in the face, that doesn't make me a bad person. Not caring about whether or not they like being farted in the face is what makes me a bad person. Likewise: You trying to "help" your jungler by berating him doesn't make you a bad person. But the fact that you refuse to accept responsibility for any other effect your words might have makes you a horrible teammate. It also makes you an idiot, because it doesn't actually serve the purpose you want it to have in the slightest.
> [{quoted}](name=TrulyBland,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=0001000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-16T23:32:35.282+0000) > > And this is why, again, you suck at communication. You do, in fact, suck so hard at communication that it starts inconveniencing others. > > If I try to befriend people by farting them in the face, that doesn't make me a bad person. > Not caring about whether or not they like being farted in the face is what makes me a bad person. > > Likewise: You trying to "help" your jungler by berating him doesn't make you a bad person. > But the fact that you refuse to accept responsibility for any other effect your words might have makes you a horrible teammate. > It also makes you an idiot, because it doesn't actually serve the purpose you want it to have in the slightest. Where did I ever imply that I don't accept responsibility for my actions? Did I not say I keep extra accounts available in case I get banned? Does that sound like the actions of someone not taking responsibility? The fact is, I will not be tone policed by anyone. Not Riot, not you, not anyone. It is the hill I will die on. I reserve the right to be a massive insensitive %%%% whenever and to whoever I choose. However, if Riot will insist on making tone policing a matter of policy, then I will simply not give them money. I would put it to you that the reason you do not go around trying to make friends by farting in people's faces is that you know this is an ineffective strategy at accomplishing your aim, but as I stated before, I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to win and if that involves telling my jungler to stop being fucking awful, then that's fine. If I say nothing and they continue to be awful, I've lost anyway. If I'm saccharinly sweet about it and we lose, then I have sacrificed my principles and still not won the game. I make myself a liar and a bitch and a cuck. I am not a liar, nor a bitch, nor a cuck and I will not bitch myself out for a win, even for the chance of a win. My wins will be earned and just and I don't care who's precious feelings I hurt along the way.
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: And why should I care that you choose to interpret me farting in your face as harassment? Communication is a two-way street. You should try to be understood the way you mean to be understood, and others should try to understand how you mean things. If you choose to simply not care about how others interpret what you are doing, you are already failing at the very core concept of communication.
> [{quoted}](name=TrulyBland,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=00010000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-16T22:43:27.980+0000) > > And why should I care that you choose to interpret me farting in your face as harassment? > > Communication is a two-way street. You should try to be understood the way you mean to be understood, and others should try to understand how you mean things. If you choose to simply not care about how others interpret what you are doing, you are already failing at the very core concept of communication. What we are doing right now, this is communication. You will notice, I'm completely ok with that. When I become truly incensed is not only when Riot decides that they are going to moderate communication by banning people who choose to communicate using scary words and when the community defends them for doing so. The only reason you should care that I wouldn't like to have my face farted in is if you care whether or not I think you're a good person or not. I don't care what my jungler thinks of me as a person, I want them to stop being awful. If they are being awful, I am going to continue to tell them so and in no uncertain language. Because I like to be clear when I communicate.
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: Because nobody wants to listen to the mad ravings of an irate gamer, "hurt feelings" or not. You might as well ask "If your feelings aren't hurt from being farted directly in the face, then why is it important for people not to intentionally fart in each others face?" You are intentionally setting a high threshold that isn't met, and then pretend that this threshold is the only relevant measurment. But that's not the case. It's absolutely possible to feel harassed by something that doesn't exactly hurt your feelings.
> [{quoted}](name=TrulyBland,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-16T19:48:28.799+0000) > > Because nobody wants to listen to the mad ravings of an irate gamer, "hurt feelings" or not. > You might as well ask "If your feelings aren't hurt from being farted directly in the face, then why is it important for people not to intentionally fart in each others face?" > > You are intentionally setting a high threshold that isn't met, and then pretend that this threshold is the only relevant measurment. But that's not the case. It's absolutely possible to feel harassed by something that doesn't exactly hurt your feelings. And why should I care that you choose to interpret my assertion that you're a fucking terrible jungler as harassment? What if I choose to feel harassed by the fact that you are being a terrible jungler? To be clear here, it's perfectly fine for you to feel that being polite is a virtue, what isn't fine is when you then take the next step to say that because you feel that way, that I am then obligated to agree with you. I don't agree with you. The difference is, I don't think you're a bad person simply because you don't agree with me.
: HAHAHAHA, don't waste your breath arguing with him, UnwardiI. That guy is from the snowflake generation, if not in age > then in spirit.
> [{quoted}](name=daemonthane,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2016-12-16T18:14:46.003+0000) > > HAHAHAHA, don't waste your breath arguing with him, UnwardiI. That guy is from the snowflake generation, if not in age > then in spirit. Oh, I know, I'm just pointing out the obvious contradiction. And technically, it's my typing fingers, not my breath, and my fingers are cold from shoveling snow anyhow.
: > [{quoted}](name=UnwardiI,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-16T04:05:17.855+0000) > > And I'm an even older generation who used the internet to tell people exactly what they thought about them and who likes their games highly competitive, bad mannered and their online interactions as brief and meaningless as possible. > > If your feelings are hurt by the angry ravings of an irate gamer on the internet, then YOU are the one with the problem. I don't need to be nicer, you need to be less of a pussy. You're quite good at your assumptions. You signed the terms of service like the rest of us. If you're getting banned, it's a lack of self control. Bad manners serves no one, least of all yourself. People would have to matter to me at all for feelings to be involved if that was a personal stab. In any case, good luck, have fun, and have a nice night. :)
> [{quoted}](name=sheldonbunny,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=0001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-16T04:55:04.842+0000) > > You're quite good at your assumptions. You signed the terms of service like the rest of us. If you're getting banned, it's a lack of self control. Bad manners serves no one, least of all yourself. > > People would have to matter to me at all for feelings to be involved if that was a personal stab. In any case, good luck, have fun, and have a nice night. :) If your feelings aren't hurt by the mad ravings of an irate gamer, then why is it important for people to be nice?
: > [{quoted}](name=UnwardiI,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-15T17:45:11.204+0000) > > Well how very christmas spirit of you, but here's a suggestion, go play the my little pony moba instead, if that's your goal. Mine is to win and if you are on my team and you are getting in my way, I'm gonna slag the fuck out of you. I will continue to do so, unless there is some positive reason for me to change my behavior. I have already changed my spending behavior accordingly, since I know this will occasionally cause my accounts to get banned, i.e. I don't spend any money on the game where I used to spend SOME money on it. Maybe if I was collecting a bunch of honors and stuff that mattered, I'd behave differently. > > Anyways, it's a standard psychological fact, you can't only punish bad behavior, you need to reinforce good behavior if you're actually interested in changing said behavior. No, it's called being an older generation typically. The 20 somethings and younger have been becoming more and more desensitized to anonymous interactions online as opposed to those of us that grew up before the internet was in homes. I interact with people online and offline the same. Most wouldn't have the nerve to talk the way they do ingame in person. You've proven yourself to be a toxic individual with your posts on here if not already stating you're getting punished on multiple accounts. I'm all for positive reinforcement, but your phrasing leaves a lot to be desired. You catch more flies with honey, as the saying goes. There's a reason season 6 had the most bans to date. Riot is cleaning out the undesirables and taking a stance against bad behavior.
> [{quoted}](name=sheldonbunny,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-16T02:46:59.613+0000) > > No, it's called being an older generation typically. The 20 somethings and younger have been becoming more and more desensitized to anonymous interactions online as opposed to those of us that grew up before the internet was in homes. I interact with people online and offline the same. Most wouldn't have the nerve to talk the way they do ingame in person. > > You've proven yourself to be a toxic individual with your posts on here if not already stating you're getting punished on multiple accounts. I'm all for positive reinforcement, but your phrasing leaves a lot to be desired. You catch more flies with honey, as the saying goes. > > There's a reason season 6 had the most bans to date. Riot is cleaning out the undesirables and taking a stance against bad behavior. And I'm an even older generation who used the internet to tell people exactly what they thought about them and who likes their games highly competitive, bad mannered and their online interactions as brief and meaningless as possible. If your feelings are hurt by the angry ravings of an irate gamer on the internet, then YOU are the one with the problem. I don't need to be nicer, you need to be less of a pussy.
: > [{quoted}](name=UnwardiI,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2016-12-15T09:04:37.610+0000) > > And you lost all credibility when you made it obvious you didn't read even half the post. I read the whole thing. Being kind for kindness sake is reward enough. Forgive some of us actually raised properly to treat people with basic human respect. But nice assumption there, wrong as it was.
> [{quoted}](name=sheldonbunny,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2016-12-15T12:42:14.789+0000) > > I read the whole thing. Being kind for kindness sake is reward enough. Forgive some of us actually raised properly to treat people with basic human respect. > > But nice assumption there, wrong as it was. Well how very christmas spirit of you, but here's a suggestion, go play the my little pony moba instead, if that's your goal. Mine is to win and if you are on my team and you are getting in my way, I'm gonna slag the fuck out of you. I will continue to do so, unless there is some positive reason for me to change my behavior. I have already changed my spending behavior accordingly, since I know this will occasionally cause my accounts to get banned, i.e. I don't spend any money on the game where I used to spend SOME money on it. Maybe if I was collecting a bunch of honors and stuff that mattered, I'd behave differently. Anyways, it's a standard psychological fact, you can't only punish bad behavior, you need to reinforce good behavior if you're actually interested in changing said behavior.
: Or you take that self centered attutude and drop it, and grow up. You lost all credit the moment you asked why you should be nice to people.
> [{quoted}](name=sheldonbunny,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2016-12-15T01:07:29.792+0000) > > Or you take that self centered attutude and drop it, and grow up. You lost all credit the moment you asked why you should be nice to people. And you lost all credibility when you made it obvious you didn't read even half the post.
: Trust me, we agree that the honor system needs a rework.
> [{quoted}](name=Riot Tantram,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ucXIJmx4,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2016-12-15T00:51:26.823+0000) > > Trust me, we agree that the honor system needs a rework. Well good, I suppose I'll believe it when I see it but that it is a thing being talked about is, I suppose, a promising thing. Primarily though, my issue isn't with the Honor system per-say, it's with the complete and total lack of any positive reinforcement towards so called good behavior, I just think the Honor system, with some tweaks, provides a decent means by which this could be delivered. But as I eluded to, I don't really have a horse in this race, all my accounts live on the precipice of perma ban at all points in time so, hope it works out whatever you guys come up with.
  Rioter Comments
: Permanently banned with no previous discipline for 2+ years
Didn't you know? Even saying %%%%%% makes you a rapist.
: Get rid of the new autofill
Indeed, get rid of it. Infact, just revert solo q to exactly how it was last season.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
arbernix (NA)
: Riot Games Threatens To Perma Ban Highest Mastery Points Singed (League ...
OMG! Riot being hypocritical! I am literally shaking...
Cowseed (NA)
: Dem bans though
But it's good for everyone who likes to play a balanced game or likes to employ actual strategy beyond "Gotta ban these 3 really powerful things or we just fucking lose". It's also good for people who like to watch the competitive scene, because it expands the pool of meta champions by a significant margin. Right now, at any given moment, a player need ONLY ever be proficient on 5 champions and that's only if you're a team solo carrier who always has their best picks banned away from them. If the meta is such that there are a few seriously OP champs, then you only need to know about 3 champs at any given time. This leads to INCREADIBLY stale and predictable games, such as we have seen for the past, oh, 3 years roughly. Having additional bans will make it so that players will need to expand their roster and force A and B tier picks into the rotation. It will also enable a single team to put a massive pinch on a single position if they want, allowing for more diverse strategies to emerge... And then get patched out by Riot enforcing the meta, but you know, we can dream. It also means that I can just perma ban Ekko and never have to play with that canceraids piece of utter bullshit ever again.
Flaherty (NA)
: Kids these days are so entitled
> [{quoted}](name=Flaherty,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=oOK1ePY5,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2016-10-06T20:25:42.100+0000) > > Kids these days are so entitled If they had done a preseason experiment for dynamic queue, listened to the masses of angry feedback about how shit it was and then decided to keep the role picking aspect and work on refining that, then maybe we could have been like "Yes, good job Riot, you're not quite there with this system yet, but this has the potential to be good. Keep up the good work etc." But that isn't what they did is it. They kept trying to force feed us bullshit, bullshit that we knew was bullshit. They would keep doing it if it weren't for the absolutely vast numbers of people constantly bombarding them with demands to put it back. All they've done is caved to popular pressure. How is that worthy of congratulations or a reason for celebration on anybody's part.
Rioter Comments
phyrram (NA)
: I 100% agree. I always play as a group of 3 so this could screw everything up.
Hey, guess what, you can still do that. It's called normals... Where you belong.
: Riot Pls: Ranked Pls - 2017 Season Ranked Changes
Fucking finally. That's all I have to say. We all told you this is what had to happen for MONTHS, all you had to do was listen, so, hooray, you finally did. Woopdeshit, if you wanted me to be happy about it, you could have done this 4 months ago.
Show more

UnwardiI

Level 89 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion