Ifneth (NA)
: *cough* maybe Tyler1 shouldn’t be imitated *cough*
I find the banter funny. If you are personally offended by being called silver when you aren't even silver that is your own issue.
HeärtNeT (EUW)
: That's the thing. Judicial system takes time and actually judge your case specifically with people responsible for it. It's obviously impossible in a videogame. There is just no way in my opinion to expect this. All you can do is make sure you don't do what can get you banned or punished in any way, regardless of the context you are in, knowing it will not be taken into account.
So the argument is that since we can't accurately judge your case, we will punish you for having an opinion and reward you for staying quiet. Seems like the basis for a broken system, pretty sure that is how dictators rationalize their actions.
: I don't see what the mute button has to do with this. You are responsible for your own actions, not them. The closest I can see is that you can "mute" yourself by not typing.
see my comment above. This type of rationale is why the system is broken in the first place. It puts an oversimplification on what is in function a judicial system. Maybe in a Utopian society this would work, but if you look at any court case for verbal harassment or slander, the case is never dropped based on a person's ability to not say anything. The cases usually debate the context quite intricately to determine the validity of the comments as constructive, relevant, or reciprocal in nature.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=adc or a dc,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=qgl14anG,comment-id=00020000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-24T21:24:08.008+0000) > > Doesn't that show error in the system then? Any judicial system enacts context as a major contributing factor. This should be a two way street then, let’s say they did ban this player for inting, that would mean everyone who has games like this should be banned including you and me. >Plus this is a game people put countless hours and a ton of money into. Also --> mute button Also not flaming, yes there is a mute button, there is also the option to not type, you have as much control as they do, it is up to you if you use it or not.
There is a difference between blatantly flaming and a subjective interpretation of my constructive criticism as flaming. If I am responding to derogatory comments in a constructive manner then my points and ability to respond should be valid. If the person who began the criticism towards me cannot take criticism back then he/she should mute me to maintain his/her one sided argument. Riot protects players from any backlash or arguments because it may affect gameplay. But especially if a game is already over and trolls are criticizing you, an attempt to offer advice seems perfectly valid. Also, look at Phreaks response to Tyler1 trolling. He calls him "a nobody with no personality." Why was he not banned or fired? - Context
: > [{quoted}](name=Pandemic Punch,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=qgl14anG,comment-id=0012,timestamp=2018-10-25T10:18:03.645+0000) > > They won't read the other person's chat Nor should they. The other person's chat is literally irrelevant when the issue that got you banned is *your* chat.
That is a terrible argument. If you were assaulted verbally or physically and acted in self defense, and judicial system would not ignore the context of the situation. If someone says something racially or personally offensive and the other person finds personal problems and retorts to argue against them, that person would never receive judicial punishment. You see this when Phreak responds to Tyler1 and states he "has no personality." Riot did not punish him because of the context of the situation and the reciprocal nature of the response to protect his own image.
Vreivai (NA)
: It was what you said at the 10:35 mark, where you said "must be silver or something." Riot is rather unforgiving when it comes to insulting a player's rank or their perceived rank.
Got that one from T1, do not think he has finished a sentence without the words diamond trash
: Tyler 1 was right- Inadvertently confirms soft inting > constructive criticism
FOLLOW UP adc or a dc: I submitted a request earlier about an end of season chat restriction I received after playing almost 170 games in less than a month following good or normal behavior. While I asked for advice to avoid future problems, all I concluded from the conversation was to not talk and only type things like "ward dragon." I submitted a discussion board (see link below) to discuss my the issues I found with this thought process. After some feedback, I feel as though the suggested behavior warrants and almost promotes an almost robotic/close-minded community. Basically I interpreted the advice as a suggestion to not to debate issues and never respond to other players in game who have any sort of critique. While at times you can cross the line, I do not believe my behavior was too over the top when looking at the overall CONTEXT and reciprocity of the situations. Basically, I was curious if there are ever times where support considers context when judging a restriction or if they just let an algorithm punish the player based on an arbitrary "law" encoded into the chat system. While I understand the need for such a system in such a large population base, I do not understand how these "more minor" situations cannot be appealed when much worse often goes unpunished (such as soft inting and not trying as reciprocated actions). https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/qgl14anG-tyler-1-was-right-inadvertently-confirms-soft-inting-constructive-criticism?comment=0004 (01:57:51 AM) Player Support Bot: Hey! We’re getting a ton of new chats right now. It may take upwards of 15 minutes to get to your chat, but if you sit tight we’ll help you out as soon as we can. If you’re not about that waiting in line lifestyle, you can always submit a ticket instead! (02:00:47 AM) *** Skiwi joined the chat *** (02:00:50 AM) Skiwi: HI there (02:01:05 AM) Skiwi: Getting caught up on your sitch now (02:01:18 AM) adc or a dc: Okay thank you, take your time (02:02:09 AM) Skiwi: Okay so basically there's two sides to this (02:03:23 AM) Skiwi: 1. we do generally think that arguing isn't what League chat should be used for, and neither is responding to negativity from other players. That said, I do agree that the first time penalty for this is kind of harsh and would leave to see it lessened in that particular circumstance (02:04:08 AM) Skiwi: 2. Honestly behavior like this really has nothing to do with inting/not trying. Those things aren't OK, and neither is arguing - the fact that sometimes people don't get caught for that doesn't mean we shouldn't penalize people for lighter behavior (02:07:14 AM) adc or a dc: Yes, I understand the second argument and tried to specify that in my prior discussions. I also understand that as a private company with set rules, the restriction is technically warranted. However that being said, my issue just lies in the fact that this removes any possibility of receiving the season rewards I put thousands of hours into (to hit gold). I know I can get the honor back over time and the restriction will not affect me in any way, but the timing was my major issue as it now removes any such possibility. (02:09:24 AM) adc or a dc: So seeing a "minor offense" that is much more minor than the affects (on gameplay) of actions I see in 10%+ of my games feels unfair in my personal opinion. (02:10:33 AM) Skiwi: Yeah I understand that - to be honest I do think chat restrictions that happen this late in the season effecting rewards this way isn't great (02:10:53 AM) Skiwi: But the thing is, any change to that would be a systemic change, and not an exception we would make for individuals (02:11:27 AM) Skiwi: I'd love to see more leeway in cases like this, but we definitely can't individual exceptions : / (02:13:38 AM) adc or a dc: Okay, thank you for your help and hopefully this is something that can be brought up in future debates regarding the topic. For myself, I guess I will have to relevel a new account, rebuy my skins and climb it back to gold in the next 2 weeks lol. (02:14:44 AM) adc or a dc: Only problem is I have 2000 worlds orbs on my account, but I should be able to get them back. (02:15:41 AM) Skiwi: I mean if the skin is that important to you, you gotta do what you gotta do (02:15:53 AM) Skiwi: but personally I would probably not give up on an account in this situation (02:17:59 AM) adc or a dc: Yeah I will have to see haha. From the discussion most people seem to agree that the person punished is usually the one getting flamed or trolled so hopefully that can be addressed one day. Thanks for your help and sorry for the long winded questions.
: That's my point though, if someone goes that bad many games in a row, its pretty clear they are doing it on purpose to ruin games for shits and giggles, and action can and should be taken. Yes most threads like these are about someone who probably just had a bad game, but that doesn't mean action shouldn't be taken about those who are doing it on purpose. Riot says its hard to detect, but unless the players are smart and only do it for a few games then actually try, are they REALLY that hard to detect? I wonder if it's just more a lack of effort on their part.
Yea your right he went 0/11 I believe actually and note this is in 13 minutes not a 30 minute game
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=adc or a dc,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=qgl14anG,comment-id=000200000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-24T21:17:35.774+0000) > > I mean the reason I got restricted seems to be what I said at the 14 minute mark when they were already pushing nexus, so no one was actually playing. Doesn’t matter, and people don’t really care about the context.
Doesn't that show error in the system then? Any judicial system enacts context as a major contributing factor. Plus this is a game people put countless hours and a ton of money into. Also --> mute button
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=adc or a dc,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=qgl14anG,comment-id=0002000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-24T21:09:19.282+0000) > > Honestly, Jamaree is right in that sense, but I just feel like the restriction is a much worse punishment when I lose season rewards for "much more minor" offense. If it was't for the timing I would not care. In a dream world, people actually inting would be seen and banned on site, however that isn’t possible as everyone “ints”. Everyone has games where they just feed their ass off and end up being seen as an inter. What is easier to catch however is a pattern of negativity that doesn’t just effect the person you are insulting but everyone including the people who just want to play with the bs going on.
I mean the reason I got restricted seems to be what I said at the 14 minute mark when they were already pushing nexus, so no one was actually playing.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=LethaLxHaze,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=qgl14anG,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2018-10-24T21:03:20.924+0000) > > Constructive criticism is a problem? PC culture nowadays OMEGALUL You and I have different definitions on the term co structure when it starts going into insults it kind of stops being constructive.
Honestly, Jamaree is right in that sense, but I just feel like the restriction is a much worse punishment when I lose season rewards for "much more minor" offense. If it was't for the timing I would not care.
Rioter Comments

adc or a dc

Level 45 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion