: Yes but back then you got the entire chat loggs did you not? Now you only get your side, So it can be taken out of context, As it has been since the tribunal was eliminated for a bot which doesn't realize every little detail. And before we could say anything she just said "f*** you I'm afk, Good luck winning without me!" As I said, This game I was not toxic, I was honest, Maybe a bit rough with the positioning bit but, After I get called a few rough names that shouldn't be repeated here, it was w/e. I stayed calm throughout the game.
Yes, and do you know one of the reasons Tribunal was discontinued? Riot found that the players themselves weren't voting differently given the context of the game. Someone trolling? Players didn't consider that in the punishment. Sure, they would consider champion species and shit like that, but that kinda thing is very rare that it actually becomes an issue. Point being, the Tribunal, which is what the automated system is based on, didn't care what the context of the game was, what others were saying or doing, etc. And the rules don't say "it's okay to do this when XYZ" either. The rules say "this isn't okay, period, at all".
: Yet go back a season and this isn't a huge problem? Why is that? I pointed out something that needed to be pointed out there. It's called honesty =/ I prefer to be told what I'm doing wrong instead of being flamed non stop.
It has always been punishable. In fact, cases like yours were frequent in the Tribunal (and were quite often punished). What is most likely is that you have not noticed small changes in your behavior - and thus you think you're saying "we need you to stay back so you don't die" - something that's not punishable - where in reality it comes out as "she keeps feeding" or similar. One of them is constructive criticism and is welcomed in League. The other is a blaming, argumentative, and aggressive statement that does nothing for game strategy. You didn't really tell them what they did wrong either. You tried to... you said general things like "bad ganks" and "bad positioning"... but **how** is it bad? Am I supposed to just figure that out as a jungler? And why did it even get to this point without you trying to help the whole game long? If you don't like what a teammate is doing, be it positioning, ganking, farming, *please* speak up. But don't be aggressive and a jerk to them - be constructive. "cs under turret 2 shots then auto for melee and one auto then one turret for caster" for example. Or "try to get ward in their jg so our jg can watch their pathing and counter". Telling someone they're bad at something does nothing to help them get better.
: Nope wasn't doing that, Eve decided to int, get 2 shutdowns, then afk, That's when I said to report, And then she started arguing about it, I just said the facts and left it at that. Edit: My bad on the Eve spelling.
You... kinda were. You were consistently arguing about who was doing worse, who wins more, whose fault it is.... That's not okay. Nor is harassing people about their behavior/performance.
: Playing for 10 years, no problems, till this year.
>Just said the straight facts Like what? Like calling people's scores out? They know. They don't need you doing that. Like trying to use your score to attempt to bully your team into listening to you? You aren't the boss. Period. No matter who's doing good or bad. You're a team. Work together, not against each other. And yes, if all you're doing is using chat to argue with your team instead of work with them, that is and has always been a punishable offense.
: or think of it this way: if i told other people to kill themselves in real life i wouldnt say the games over. I'd kick the shit out of them and end the game
That has nothing to do with this. You agreed to rules. You broke those rules. Riot told you that if you broke the rules again you get a permanent ban. You agree when you get your license to not speed. You will get a warning maybe, then a ticket, but after a few tickets you'll get your license taken away for an amount of time (or even permanently).
: ...aaand what does any of this have to do with your original claim, that Riot would hold off on issuing a ban because of a threat like this?
? It's common knowledge that police will ask companies (or get a court order) to keep the status quo like this in cases where it may hamper an investigation. The links are proof police will get involved in cases based on online threats.
Kurorade (NA)
: fix top fix top fix top fix top fix top fix top fix top fix top fix top fix top fix top fix top fix
: > There are multiple cases where crime was committed and the investigation reveals that the final straw was a preventable action that could've been avoided had warning signs been observed and reported appropriately. Cite sources related to gaming.
https://www.pcgamer.com/police-report-no-active-threat-at-twitch-hq-following-social-media-scare/ https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/video-shows-mom-react-son-s-arrest-online-shooting-threat-n1044731 https://sportshandle.com/alabama-student-sports-betting-louisiana-arrest/ http://katv.com/news/local/arkansas-law-agencies-possible-shooting-threat And many more. Threats are not just discarded because they occur on a game or online.
: So what your saying is all those games i averaged 3 or 4 honours on this account count for nothing cause of 1 game. Good system
One week is hardly "all those games". Think of it this way - you may get a few warnings, then just a ticket for speeding. But eventually, you don't get a license.
: Dude. No. Just no. Stop.
There are multiple cases where crime was committed and the investigation reveals that the final straw was a preventable action that could've been avoided had warning signs been observed and reported appropriately. Even if 99% of threats on League are inaccurate, Riot (nor the involved player) will not want to be the one with the news story "attack happens, final straw was League ban after player stated attack in chat".
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=W3VIz2aU,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-24T00:16:03.950+0000) > You were warned with your 14 day ban that any more misbehavior would result in this outcome. Next time you are given a clear warning to not do something, I suggest you treat it as if the person warning you is not bluffing. Riot does not "joke" or bluff about punishments. Yes i was warned over 2 months ago, and 1 game decided if i should be perma'd rather than my teammates who told me to kill myself.
Time doesn't heal wounds. Nor does simply the passage of time say that you have changed your behavior. You took a 5 month break from this account. Then when you came back, you within a week showed you had not changed your behavior. That's like saying that "well if I drop off the face of the Earth for a couple years then my mortgage should be cancelled but I should still own the house because I came back and I changed and would've been paying it". No, by that time, the company has taken your house and resold it (likely at a loss) to pay off the mortgage you failed to pay. Next time you are given a final warning, don't expect your relationship with that person/company to heal just because time has passed.
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=WJeIXAAN,comment-id=00000000000100010000,timestamp=2019-10-24T00:19:02.424+0000) > > You realize a criminal investigation does not just involve "looking at the chat logs"? > > Riot would have had to look at the chat logs, investigate that account's history and data, determine if the threat is credible... > > **Then**, they would've had to contact the local authorities, who would then get in contact with the appropriate federal agency to initiate a cross-jurisdictional investigation. A threat that has no personal information may be put on the backburner by that agency which likely is also dealing with many other cases. > > And while that federal agency is investigating, the last thing they want to do is change the situation. Let's say that player **did** know where you live and have the means to act on that threat. An account suspension may very well be the last straw that breaks the camel's back and causes them to act on that threat. No agency is going to want "well, we were too slow" or "well, if we hadn't banned them maybe this wouldn't have happened" to be in the press - be it Riot, local police, or a federal investigative authority. I suppose that makes sense. I guess I didn't see his threats as all THAT threatening, I just thought he was incredibly toxic, like way over-the-top, worse than Tyler1 in the old days, toxic. But MAYBE he actually meant what he said. A scary thought for sure. If his threats really did hold weight, then it does make sense that riot went to the proper authorities to discuss things first. Thanks for clearing this up for me.
I do hope they weren't serious, and to be completely honest, there's a 99% chance they weren't. Edgy teens make threats on the internet all the time. However, the 1% of threats (or whatever the number is) that **are** real is still too high to potentially disturb the status quo and cause bad things to happen to people simply because the police weren't consulted or involved first.
: > If Riot is performing an investigation, or if Riot deems the threat credible and is in cooperation with authorities, they may decide or even be ordered to not take any suspension action on the account until the investigation is concluded. You know, usually I try to defend you, but from where do you pull some of this ridiculous stuff? Jesus.
To expand on the above, many investigations have "hold policies" (which probably have a technical name that I'm unaware of). This can be a decision of the company, who deems the risk of tipping off the individual to the investigation to be too high, but could also come from local police (who may just "recommend" Riot not do anything until the FBI or other agency gets involved). If it makes it to a cross-jurisdictional investigation (which is by definition a state or federal level, depending on whether it is within the same state or not), then the federal agency will almost certainly instruct Riot (or any other company) not to take any action that they do not expressly and specifically approve of. For threats of harm in this world, unfortunately, it isn't just as simple as being able to go knock on someone's door and instantly arresting them or clearing the threat. There are mountains of data about an individual Riot has, all of which have to be sorted through to determine credibility and assist the investigation. Furthermore, there is **always** a risk when actions are taken (or not taken) with respect to investigating threats of behavior. By taking action such as a suspension, it may tip off the person that their behavior is being investigated, resulting in that person being able to cover their tracks - turning a credible threat into something that results in no action, and that person (who is a danger) being permitted to continue this. It also could result in the player who *could* act on a threat actually doing so - the anger of seeing their account suspended may be the last straw they needed to decide to actually act on the threat. Today's policing has gotten to the point where "all" threats are treated as credible until investigated (sans threats that are obviously fake). Furthermore, investigating threats of harm that have not been acted on centers around the same concept of hostage negotiation: "don't change the situation until 110% sure the change will be 110% good". The argument as to whether this is appropriate or necessary is a political one that isn't appropriate to get into on the boards. However, the amount of shootings, "swattings", and other threats that hindsight shows were advertised or had warning clues on seemingly innocuous fora (such as online, or through text, or whatever) has resulted in this in the US and around the world. I'd love for police to have a crystal ball and be able to determine instantly this player was joking and tell Riot "not credible, it's all yours". But since they don't, police will **always** err on the side of maintaining the status quo until such time as the threat can be either cleared or acted upon (with an arrest or "talking to" by police). **** The number of people with knowledge of the inner workings of Riot on this issue is going to be limited to a handful. Companies have specific "rapid response" style teams for this sort of thing (and similar or the same teams will also handle things like child pornography, wire fraud, etc that may be committed on that company's property). I have never personally served on one of these teams, but I have had to be involved in such investigations multiple times over conduct on the internet (in that I either reported or witnessed it and thus was part of the investigation). Such "abuse" teams tend to operate on a strict "don't change the status quo until you know it'll change for the better" policy because of the reasons I've said. For one, they don't want to get in trouble for tampering with evidence if there is a criminal case (it's a "cover our asses" thing). For two, they don't want to turn a situation into a worse one by meddling. Companies are not police. The police have much more experience and pull for investigating this sort of thing. As such, a company will almost always, when the police will be or have gotten involved, let them handle it 100% until it is over or they are instructed to do something. **** One thing I'll add - Riot has lawyers that are well versed in discussing this with authorities and complying with the laws, and I don't think it's appropriate for us to second guess them as lay bystanders with little to no experience.
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=WJeIXAAN,comment-id=000000000001,timestamp=2019-10-24T00:10:37.590+0000) > > If Riot is performing an investigation, or if Riot deems the threat credible and is in cooperation with authorities, they may decide or even be *ordered* to not take any suspension action on the account until the investigation is concluded. > > You're free to submit a support ticket to ensure that a human is reviewing it. However, again, Riot will not tell you the result of the investigation or account punishment, and you are **not** an unbiased party who is appropriate to say "this player deserves X". So it may take more than half a week for them to look at chat logs? Well, that at least gives me an answer to my question, although it's certainly not one I was hoping for, and it definitely raises more problems than solves them. Like why it takes them so long to ban a player for saying things like this. I dunno, maybe I'm just too dense to grasp this, but looking over one games' worth of chat logs, especially when three lines of text from their massive novel of impotent hatred they wrote is enough to ban them for life, doesn't seem like it would take more than four days to act upon. But maybe you're right. I haven't seen the other side, so maybe the process takes longer than I thought.
You realize a criminal investigation does not just involve "looking at the chat logs"? Riot would have had to look at the chat logs, investigate that account's history and data, determine if the threat is credible... **Then**, they would've had to contact the local authorities, who would then get in contact with the appropriate federal agency to initiate a cross-jurisdictional investigation. A threat that has no personal information may be put on the backburner by that agency which likely is also dealing with many other cases. And while that federal agency is investigating, the last thing they want to do is change the situation. Let's say that player **did** know where you live and have the means to act on that threat. An account suspension may very well be the last straw that breaks the camel's back and causes them to act on that threat. No agency is going to want "well, we were too slow" or "well, if we hadn't banned them maybe this wouldn't have happened" to be in the press - be it Riot, local police, or a federal investigative authority.
: 1 game. A singular game where more than half my team wanted me to be dead in real life.
You were warned with your 14 day ban that any more misbehavior would result in this outcome. Next time you are given a clear warning to not do something, I suggest you treat it as if the person warning you is not bluffing. Riot does not "joke" or bluff about punishments. If you do not behave, Riot does not want you to play League. They gave you chances to learn to either control your behavior or to learn how to mute players before you get toxic. You did not pay attention, and that is nobody's fault.
: Permanently banned for one game where all i said is the game was a loss
Yes, this sort of arguing, defeatist, and passive aggressive attitude is clearly against the Summoner's Code. You were instructed to go review the Summoner's Code after your 14 day ban, and you returned to this sort of behavior which is unacceptable, hence you were given a permanent ban.
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=WJeIXAAN,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-23T23:44:27.611+0000) > > They don't. Behavior like you describe is met with **at a bare minimum** a 14 day ban. It may also result in a permanent ban and potentially contacting authorities if Riot deems the threats credible. You are not going to be notified of the action taken against their account, because Riot is still bound by its privacy policy (the same one that applies to you). On op.gg, the guy was still playing that day after the game and being reported by two separate people, one of which was on the enemy team, and one of which was me. More people may have reported him, although that is unlikely, as another person on my team also flamed me hard for loading in late. I checked back in, and the guy was STILL playing two days later. And, just now, I checked, and he has just finished a game 30 minutes or so ago. So yeah. I stand by my statement.
If Riot is performing an investigation, or if Riot deems the threat credible and is in cooperation with authorities, they may decide or even be *ordered* to not take any suspension action on the account until the investigation is concluded. You're free to submit a support ticket to ensure that a human is reviewing it. However, again, Riot will not tell you the result of the investigation or account punishment, and you are **not** an unbiased party who is appropriate to say "this player deserves X".
: Player Threatens My Life and Gets Zero Punishment
They don't. Behavior like you describe is met with **at a bare minimum** a 14 day ban. It may also result in a permanent ban and potentially contacting authorities if Riot deems the threats credible. You are not going to be notified of the action taken against their account, because Riot is still bound by its privacy policy (the same one that applies to you).
Hoku (NA)
: Quitting League
You do not get banned for using the mute and report features (defending yourself). You get banned when you are toxic. Please review the Summoner's Code. Nowhere in it does it say "it's okay to break these rules if someone else did something first".
: You can get ban for saying it once. Second, many player report other and riot just look at the player who get their honor lock first.
Nope, that's not how it works at all. The only thing you can get banned for saying once is things like hate speech, and telling other players to kill themselves. Period. Nothing else gets you banned for "saying it once". Furthermore, the system **does not care how many times you are reported**. Each reported game is reviewed by the system - if you did not misbehave, or if you only minorly did, it **will not** punish you.
: You should look at why the system is broken. The system just need 1 person report to make a ban while all you need to do is saying a certain amount of words to get ban. And those who report tend to false reporting and the system is so automated that their is no real human look at the map to see what is going on. This just mean the 4 years system completely behind its time.
No, saying "a certain amount of words" does not get a ban. Period. Nor do false reports.
Kai Guy (NA)
: Help Wanted. Caculating LP Slant
Multiple websites such as op.gg have tried this. There's a reason op.gg and most other sites no longer even display these (or have renamed them to "fancier" things like "op.gg score"). The system is designed as such that it cannot be gamed - there is no need to know your MMR because you'd also have to know everyone else's MMR in order to make any claims that the system is inaccurate.
: Why does Riot report system is so unfair?
The game mode does not matter, nor does it matter what other players are doing or have done. Flaming is against the rules, and this is clear in the Summoner's Code. Whether you agree with this or not, it is not unfair because **those same rules are applied to all players**. Furthermore, trolling players **do** get punished, and if you'd read this board you'd see that some players do come to complain. The reason more do not is because most times they **know** what they did was wrong - so the only ones who come complain are those who think they've succeeded in cheating Riot - they think they "look" like they weren't intentionally feeding - but they were.
Trixxy (NA)
: ISSUES WITH UPDATING RIOT CLIENT
Have you checked the support website? It will refer you to download the hextech repair tool and run through the options it provides to repair/reinstall the client.
karmilah (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OER3zuzW,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-23T22:21:54.338+0000) > > While it’s almost certain that Riot maintains old patches (ex: for watching replays of games to investigate rule violations), as far as I know they do not offer a “conversion” for old replay files. > > Keep in mind that the resolution of it would have to be limited - a full 40 minute game recording would take up potentially 30+ GB uncompressed at 1080p, and when you start considering various compressions you run into the issue of players wanting different formats which puts more work on Riot. > > Unfortunately I don’t see much benefit from them offering this. It doesn’t really hurt to ask though. soo basically i'm out of luck for this replay :( that's a bummer, considering how often riot patches i would hope that there would be some way to return to old patches just for replays? it's just a shame...
> [{quoted}](name=karmilah,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OER3zuzW,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-23T22:35:08.311+0000) > > soo basically i'm out of luck for this replay :( that's a bummer, considering how often riot patches i would hope that there would be some way to return to old patches just for replays? it's just a shame... Aside from hotfixes (which do not happen every patch), patches happen once every two weeks, sometimes extended to three around holidays. The patching schedule for League is consistent and has been the same for years now. Patch day is Wednesday morning (before you wake up, so possibly Tuesday night depending on what timezone you're in compared to the server time).
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=YvEqrUea,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2019-10-23T13:14:55.894+0000)But it also is clear that you’re controlling the voting. Whether you are using Smurf’s of yours or getting other people to vote for you, it’s obvious somethings up. With all due respect, rujitra, knock it off. I *know* you don't have the tools available to accuse a specific individual of vote manipulation with certainty, so don't. It does nothing but create arguments. Even if you're confident vote manipulation *is* occurring, placing blame is antagonistic and unnecessary.
Understood and sorry. I won't comment on the voting further. However, I did ask another question (which I drowned out with the voting discussion, so I do not fault you for not seeing it at all, and I wasn't clear on it to begin with): Is there a best way to report comments that are rule violating for being deliberately misleading/contradictory? While I'm not sure if you can still see (because I think the OP themselves deleted, not a moderator) the comments the OP made on that thread, the game they linked you does not match claims they made about their teammates. In fact, the OP in that thread has shifted from claiming it was a "warwick and nasus" to claiming it was in team chat thus shouldn't be punishable to claiming that it shouldn't be punishable at all (and in between those multiple times). While I think you don't necessarily need to look at the thread more, is the best way to report something like that in the discord given that there is no way to add a "report comment" to explain why it's misleading? Just for future reference? And would I be able to bring concerns over voting there as well (so as to avoid me bitching about it in the thread itself or in a separate thread like this) that way I can know that my report is understood and looked at (even if nothing's done - I just want to make sure it's looked at)? Thanks.
karmilah (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OER3zuzW,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-23T20:11:13.940+0000) > > There is - you can record the games live. > > That takes up many times the space on your computer and/or Riot servers. Which is why it is done this way. > > A rofl replay file is not a video, it is a list of actions that are taken in the game. When buffs and nerfs happen, those actions may no longer make sense. As one example, if someone’s ability or item gets buffed, what was an escape would maybe be a kill. And then the entire game is thrown off. for now i'm asking for this particular game/replay. i still have the file! i just didn't know that the new patch was coming this morning so i didn't get the chance to save it.
> [{quoted}](name=karmilah,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OER3zuzW,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-10-23T21:58:13.409+0000) > > for now i'm asking for this particular game/replay. i still have the file! i just didn't know that the new patch was coming this morning so i didn't get the chance to save it. While it’s almost certain that Riot maintains old patches (ex: for watching replays of games to investigate rule violations), as far as I know they do not offer a “conversion” for old replay files. Keep in mind that the resolution of it would have to be limited - a full 40 minute game recording would take up potentially 30+ GB uncompressed at 1080p, and when you start considering various compressions you run into the issue of players wanting different formats which puts more work on Riot. Unfortunately I don’t see much benefit from them offering this. It doesn’t really hurt to ask though.
karmilah (NA)
: Replays from previous patch?
There is - you can record the games live. That takes up many times the space on your computer and/or Riot servers. Which is why it is done this way. A rofl replay file is not a video, it is a list of actions that are taken in the game. When buffs and nerfs happen, those actions may no longer make sense. As one example, if someone’s ability or item gets buffed, what was an escape would maybe be a kill. And then the entire game is thrown off.
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=WAHUKlq5,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-10-23T19:55:29.524+0000) > > It is. > > Unfortunately, Riot stopped punishing refusal to communicate years ago. They never punished anyone for that in the first place. Riot only removed it from the report list - however, it was never more than a placebo.
That was the unskilled player report. They actually did punish failure to communicate if someone refused to communicate in any form.
Pika Fox (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=nraaBVBi,comment-id=00010000000100000000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-23T19:02:14.447+0000) > > Yet.... it hasn't. > > Drivers' licenses are not universal, and they have rules attached to them - which if you break, you lose your license to drive. This makes your car that you bought useless. > > Digital licences are no different than licenses to use a physical product - be it a room/building reservation, a condo/timeshare, etc. And physical licences have been around and confirmed valid in courts many times. Losing access to driving does not lose access to your vehicle, which you can still use for its stereo or to sell. You still entirely own the physical good attached.
But you don’t have access to driving, which is what the license was for.
: How is disabling allied chat not considered "Refusing to Communicate"?
It is. Unfortunately, Riot stopped punishing refusal to communicate years ago.
: So confessions mean nothing then? Please do inform our court system of that. I'm not sure they're aware. You're clearly missing my point, deliberately or not. The rightful owner of the account was not duoing with someone else. Someone else was playing on their account and duoing with a second person. At the very least, this is account sharing and is also against TOS. Also, there were plenty of games played on the rightful owner's account that were played by the booster alone, outside of duo. Boosting is when a person other than the rightful owner plays ranked on that person's account and elevates them to a higher, unearned, rank. I'm saying, this is what happened; they were boosted. Why don't you take your own advice then, if that's how you feel, and stop commenting on my post?
They confessed to boosting - which is commonly used to refer to two different things - account sharing boosting and duo queue boosting. Only one of those is punishable. Likewise, I can confess to going 80 MPH on the highway all I want. That's illegal everywhere in a few states (northeast). It's not illegal in Texas and many other southern/western states. The same confession can be confessing to a crime or not based on what it's referring to. You do not know who was playing on the account. You have no way to know. Period. You are using **circumstantial evidence** to try and prove a crime has taken place. It'd be like if a shooting happened and I had evidence that Joe was there because Joe took three selfies around that area. It doesn't prove he was at the scene of the crime. Circumstantial evidence is not proof of anything.
: No, I'm saying that, the person who was boosting them, used that person's account to duo with someone else. How do I know this? Because the rightful owner of the account is strictly a support player who only plays 3-4 champions, mainly Sona, Karma, and Lulu, with the occasional, rare, Rakan game. However, they were magically able to play every other role, on numerous champions, at a high rank level, enough to rank up within a few days, despite them only getting on to play 4-5 games every 3-4 months, and in those few games, only playing support. That's exactly what I'm saying. That someone, other than the account owner, was playing ranked, and while they were at it, they duo'd with another person, who had been hardstuck silver the previous season, and just took them up to gold with them in those few days. It'd just be a case of smurfing, if it wasn't for the fact that they were using someone else's account to do it, and ranking up that person's account in the process. No, I said I assumed they got another 14 day ban. I clearly noted that it was an assumption, as Riot doesn't disclose that sort of information. Then, this simply means that they weren't punished at all. Good job, Riot. Also, yes I can know, because this person boasted to me that they were getting boosted and I screencaped that conversation. More proof was them going from solely playing Sona, to suddenly playing Tryn 13 games a row until they hit gold, then going back to playing Sona. It might not be indisputable proof, but it is pretty damning evidence.
That isn't proof of anything. You have no proof whatsoever, you have what is called **circumstantial evidence**. They may very well have claimed they were getting boosted, but **boosting by duoing with someone is not prohibited** unless someone is logging in on the account - which **you have no proof of**. I encourage you to stop trying to find issue with others and just focus on yourself, it's a much healthier attitude to have in life.
Böljy (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Get2,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=UKn0gpAx,comment-id=00020001,timestamp=2019-10-23T18:49:40.146+0000) > > People need to learn to disempower their aggressors. Take the insult, own it. > > "You're a potato!" > "Mom? Is that you? Get back in the kitchen and make me some dinner." > > People need to learn to flip situations and not take stuff personally. We don't need more censorship. It's not like anyone can really personally attack you in a game, unless they resort to 4chan tactics, and then it's FBI time. I find the insults themself funny if they are creative enough. Calling someone gay is pretty much boring to everyone, but if someone were to come to me and say something like: "I would rather tie myself from my leg to a tree and pretend to be a branch than play with you", I would probably laugh at it for the next few hours.
> [{quoted}](name=Böljy,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=UKn0gpAx,comment-id=000200010000,timestamp=2019-10-23T18:53:14.590+0000) > > I find the insults themself funny if they are creative enough. Calling someone gay is pretty much boring to everyone, but if someone were to come to me and say something like: "I would rather tie myself from my leg to a tree and pretend to be a branch than play with you", I would probably laugh at it for the next few hours. Absolutely not. Calling someone gay is not boring. The use of the word "gay" as an insult is dehumanizing, demoralizing, insensitive, and discriminatory - it is the very definition of hate speech. Because by saying that the word "gay" can be an insult, you are saying that it is some how insulting or bad to be gay - which is absolutely not appropriate. Virtually everything you have said in this thread is a sign of problems that cannot be solved on the boards or without a psychologist. This is not normal human mental behavior or attitude, period.
: People like you deserve to have the free rewards taken away completely. Ungrateful players smh.
> [{quoted}](name=JustDonnyy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=VzbLfpuV,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-23T18:58:56.190+0000) > > People like you deserve to have the free rewards taken away completely. Ungrateful players smh. If this sort of complaint becomes commonplace I wouldn't be surprised to see them taken away from **everyone**. At some point Riot will decide that the backlash they're getting is going to outweigh the good they're doing by giving free stuff... and just not give the free stuff at all - because then nobody can complain it wasn't "good enough".
: and? then they'll ban a lvl30 account. I'm well aware of the fact that they can do this, so I just use one of five other accounts... And that's the point: I'm not losing a single second in feeder games, I'm just taking another account to play and try winning games. and wtf is wrong with you, I can't and won't understand that they can't permamute me, which results in a non-toxic player after all, but yeah go ahead. you will literally change nothing with that effort.
> [{quoted}](name=omæwamœshindeiru,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ZxYsGxrk,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-10-23T16:57:18.420+0000) > > and? then they'll ban a lvl30 account. I'm well aware of the fact that they can do this, so I just use one of five other accounts... > > And that's the point: I'm not losing a single second in feeder games, I'm just taking another account to play and try winning games. > > and wtf is wrong with you, I can't and won't understand that they can't permamute me, which results in a non-toxic player after all, but yeah go ahead. you will literally change nothing with that effort. Ah, yes, you complain about toxic gameplay behavior such as "feeding" but then you AFK. Where is the logic? And why can't you just disable chat in your settings?
: Does Riot Not Care about Boosting?
You can't "give boosts" on your own account. That's literally just you playing on your account. Furthermore, boosting **requires** that a player other than the account owner is playing ranked games on the account. It does **NOT** include any form of duo queue. Period. Furthermore, you say they got a "second 14 day ban" - that's not how it works. If they got a 14 day ban for boosting originally, then their next boosting punishment would be a permanent, irrevocable suspension. Period. There is no "cooldown" time - you get one warning on an account, and even 5 years later another offense is a permanent ban. This means that you are not correct in that they were banned twice for boosting if it was 14 days each time. They may have been punished for some other behavior that was identified - be it chat, griefing, etc. And this is more likely - because you cannot, at all, through public data, determine if it's two separate people playing on an account. There's many reasons that players may do things like change summoner spells - as one example when I am not at my desktop but want to play, I cannot use the "program" buttons as my summoner spells, so I will put flash on F - but I'll use a mouse button or a pinky button on my keyboard if I'm on my desktop. Point being you have no way to know they're boosted or not, and Riot will not punish them just because you have "proof" (that isn't really proof, since proof would have to be IP logs and digital biometric data such as keypresses/mouse movements - things only Riot has).
Pika Fox (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=nraaBVBi,comment-id=000100000001000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-10-23T18:04:43.020+0000) > > I’ll be waiting. Because it won’t. It will, because it has to in order for anything to function at all in an age where most of your possessions are going to be digital goods. You forget that the court system and laws on the books are still in a largely pre computer era. The EU is already moving towards digital goods being personal possessions. The US will follow suit.
Yet.... it hasn't. Drivers' licenses are not universal, and they have rules attached to them - which if you break, you lose your license to drive. This makes your car that you bought useless. Digital licences are no different than licenses to use a physical product - be it a room/building reservation, a condo/timeshare, etc. And physical licences have been around and confirmed valid in courts many times.
Pika Fox (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=NIKΟ,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=nraaBVBi,comment-id=0001000000010000000000000001,timestamp=2019-10-23T17:19:10.531+0000) > > Are you dumb? When you pay for an item it belongs to you. Your entitled to either the item or your money back. When you buy a digital item on an account that doesn't belong to you, riot has all rights to ban your acc if they feel like it. You have agreed to the ToA's, you think youd win in court when youve agreed too that riot owns all rights over your acc? And again, thats going to change, and quickly.
I’ll be waiting. Because it won’t.
: Hey there I own the thread that is being ummm lets call it questioned by the man that is rujitra. I deleted a comment that was misleading quickly. If that is intentional lying then I am clearly at fault but I immediately fixed the issue. So don't know why this guy made a whole thing about me kinda cool tho. Also in another note this man has been aggressive on both my pages since I have come here to the boards and even makes accusations with no evidence is this not real harassment? I mean I hate to be that guy but there is a reason that every single comment that you make is immediately spammed down and it sure isn't me.
Misleading implies there was a small error in logic or similar. You blatantly lied about your situation. And we know it isn’t you voting. But it also is clear that you’re controlling the voting. Whether you are using Smurf’s of yours or getting other people to vote for you, it’s obvious somethings up.
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=YvEqrUea,comment-id=000300000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-22T18:45:19.092+0000)I think a much better solution to this thread should have been editing any comments (not just mine) that had parts outside the rules, then lock the thread with a comment explaining that the thread is not in accordance with rules. I can have someone take another look at it when we have time, but we are not typically in the habit of aggressive comment editing. >If these rules are not going to be enforced even in such an obvious case as this thread, then there is no sense even having those rules present in the boards rules. See above. When we see a claim on the boards we do not typically do investigative research to determine it's truthfulness, especially on Player Behavior where players are prone to exaggeration and it is often hard to prove definitively one way or another. It tends to be largely self-corrective in terms of how the community responds.
I would presume something as easy as this would be quick and simple. But I understand. Sorry to bother.
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=YvEqrUea,comment-id=000300000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-22T18:45:19.092+0000)I think a much better solution to this thread should have been editing any comments (not just mine) that had parts outside the rules, then lock the thread with a comment explaining that the thread is not in accordance with rules. I can have someone take another look at it when we have time, but we are not typically in the habit of aggressive comment editing. >If these rules are not going to be enforced even in such an obvious case as this thread, then there is no sense even having those rules present in the boards rules. See above. When we see a claim on the boards we do not typically do investigative research to determine it's truthfulness, especially on Player Behavior where players are prone to exaggeration and it is often hard to prove definitively one way or another. It tends to be largely self-corrective in terms of how the community responds.
I really don’t mean to be a bother, but this thread clearly violates the rules and no action has been taken 6+ hours later.
: i mean, it's fully plausible that the following happened: player1: what are your favorite animals? player2: cats MythicAgent: dogs now, it's fairly improbable that this happened, but just "dogs" by itself is open to interpretation
Why wouldn’t the OP have said this then, instead of blatantly lying about their match history which is publicly verifiable?
rujitra (NA)
: You provided context. It was a blatant lie. As such, everyone will assume that the context is that which you are **intentionally** lying about to obfuscate the real reason for your punishment.
The OP claimed they were referring to two champions -one of which was only present in a couple games since their 14 day ban, and the other of which was not present in any game since their 14 day ban. When they were called out on this, they deleted that comment.
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=GudYOdae,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-22T19:46:22.254+0000) > > i feel like the most important thing is discussing why the fuck Riot is removing two balanced and used items for no reason Because Ohmwrecker is underpowered and not used at all (and hasn't been used in its entire existence), so removing it is a minor gain (no trap purchase in store) with no downside. Zz'rot meanwhile was bought, but hasn't really seen major use since it's nerf and isn't a very healthy design. As such removing it is a moderate gain (currently trap item for most champs, does unhealthy things when it isn't a trap) compared to keeping it. So the best decision game health and player experience wise was removing them.
> [{quoted}](name=Lord Dusteon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=GudYOdae,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-10-22T19:49:52.466+0000) > > Because Ohmwrecker is underpowered and not used at all (and hasn't been used in its entire existence), so removing it is a minor gain (no trap purchase in store) with no downside. Zz'rot meanwhile was bought, but hasn't really seen major use since it's nerf and isn't a very healthy design. As such removing it is a moderate gain (currently trap item for most champs, does unhealthy things when it isn't a trap) compared to keeping it. > > So the best decision game health and player experience wise was removing them. OhmWrecker is **NOT** underpowered. It's extremely powerful when used right. I don't think "lack of use since nerf" is a valid reason to remove things - they should be balanced better. Regardless, personally, I feel like both these items are suffering more from players not understanding how they work or how to play them...
xScarfy (EUW)
: Petition to make the Voidspawn from Zz'Rot Portal a Little Legend
i feel like the most important thing is discussing why the fuck Riot is removing two balanced and used items for no reason ###############but yes pls if it remove
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=YvEqrUea,comment-id=000300000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-22T18:45:19.092+0000)I think a much better solution to this thread should have been editing any comments (not just mine) that had parts outside the rules, then lock the thread with a comment explaining that the thread is not in accordance with rules. I can have someone take another look at it when we have time, but we are not typically in the habit of aggressive comment editing. >If these rules are not going to be enforced even in such an obvious case as this thread, then there is no sense even having those rules present in the boards rules. See above. When we see a claim on the boards we do not typically do investigative research to determine it's truthfulness, especially on Player Behavior where players are prone to exaggeration and it is often hard to prove definitively one way or another. It tends to be largely self-corrective in terms of how the community responds.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=YvEqrUea,comment-id=00030000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2019-10-22T19:14:02.110+0000) > > Because, simply put, we don't always read every post on every thread to see who or what has disproved what points and how. I know that may bother you, but it's not feasible. I have said I'll have someone else take a look at it, but that's all I can promise right now. That is 90% of what I'm asking for. The other 10% is to maybe have an internal discussion with moderators about what signs in a post may indicate that there is a bigger problem. To my understanding you review posts from a "report list" which I believe only shows that one post. As such, it may be impossible to get the context from the report itself. As one example, it may appear that someone is flaming/being uncivil, but in reality they are attempting to do this "community policing" you are describing, and that maybe the better action is instead of performing multiple removals, the entire thread is simply locked or removed. As I have said, I do not have a problem with any actions taken (or not) with regards to this thread - it is your right as the moderation team to moderate, and you certainly aren't obligated to do anyone's bidding (well, except Riot, but that's a given). I'm merely trying to grasp why this thread which is obviously bad has now had two moderators pass over it without it being locked (voting or completely) or removed. I am not faulting any individual - I feel that it likely results from a lack of tools (something you can't fix, I know) as well as potentially a lack of time/training as to when to look more into reports. I think we are on the same page now for the most part and as such I will give you another great thanks for engaging in this conversation (something that some communities on the internet suffer from a lack of). I'll end by saying I appreciate everything you and the moderation team does - especially since it's for free and it sounds like you don't get a ton of tech or other support from Riot. I hope you all have a nice day (and pass on my appreciation to the other mods, would ya?).
: Yeah it sucks that you guys have no context
You provided context. It was a blatant lie. As such, everyone will assume that the context is that which you are **intentionally** lying about to obfuscate the real reason for your punishment.
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=YvEqrUea,comment-id=000300000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-22T18:45:19.092+0000)I think a much better solution to this thread should have been editing any comments (not just mine) that had parts outside the rules, then lock the thread with a comment explaining that the thread is not in accordance with rules. I can have someone take another look at it when we have time, but we are not typically in the habit of aggressive comment editing. >If these rules are not going to be enforced even in such an obvious case as this thread, then there is no sense even having those rules present in the boards rules. See above. When we see a claim on the boards we do not typically do investigative research to determine it's truthfulness, especially on Player Behavior where players are prone to exaggeration and it is often hard to prove definitively one way or another. It tends to be largely self-corrective in terms of how the community responds.
Then I encourage the Universal Rules to be refactored to remove these "guidelines" that are not policed. I am not asking you to have a crystal ball or investigate every thread. But when there are multiple intentional and obvious falsehoods proving the thread to be a troll thread to begin with, **in addition to the vote manipulation**, why has it not been closed?
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=YvEqrUea,comment-id=0003000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-22T18:36:25.468+0000)It did not use to be disabled on the "front page" (i.e. the discussions list), but now is. I do not see how it would be "harmful" to disable it within threads, or impact the usability at all. A lot of the board's organization methods rely on it to determine thread visibility / display order, and when we *have* removed voting we got meaningful user pushback. As a result we have determined that the occasional vote manipulation is a reasonable price to pay for retaining voting functionality. We *did* remove it from the home page to stop people from simply bouncing up and down the popular thread and upvoting/downvoting without reading them, but we've determined it not worth the price of removing voting altogether. > Because what is more "harmful" to the boards is permitting threads with blatant lies/misinformation to stand massively upvoted with no check or balance at all. Bluntly, we are not fact police, nor do we have the manpower to be fact police. An incorrect comment can be pointed out as such in a manner that still abides by the board rules.
I do not feel that my comments were so far outside the rules that they merited deleting, but I respect that it is the moderators' decision. I think a much better solution to this thread should have been editing any comments (not just mine) that had parts outside the rules, then lock the thread with a comment explaining that the thread is not in accordance with rules. I appreciate that you cannot be fact police for everything. However, the boards rules clearly cut out that posts that are trolling, or deliberately spreading misinformation, are not permissible. If these rules are not going to be enforced even in such an obvious case as this thread, then there is no sense even having those rules present in the boards rules.
Show more

rujitra

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion