: Chat logs are bullshit, they're sent to the player with only what THEY said and out of context. Two lines in it in particular look bad out of context but aren't toxic at all. "Well I wish you all would die" - Ahri, that seems pretty toxic to me (Responding to a flaming Ahri on why the team thinks she should be reported) Now you're 4/3/10 (a couple minutes after Lucian was complaining that he was only 0/3/something because he wasn't getting kills, wasn't doing as well as he'd like)
The only thing that matters is what **you** said. You can control your own behavior, no one is forcing you to type anything. It's never appropriate to tell a stranger that you wish they would die. Just, FYI. The only context we need is that you told someone you wished they would die. That's toxic. Although, possibly you're saying Ahri said that after the team was discussing why she should be reported. In which case the team was a bunch of jerks for doing that. Seriously, grow up.
mah1foo (EUW)
: You're right, I edited it to one week. And when you get chat restricted, first thing you think isn't "oh i download the demo", since chat doesn't show up there.
No, but probably around my 2 post to the boards I'm downloading everything if I haven't already.
Awf Meta (NA)
: > Which is exactly why you have to have a history of negativity. Everyone has a bad day. Then how is a person supposed to counter Riots claims? If everyone has an instance of negativity in their history, there is no counter argument when Riot decides to punish. Riot will even go so far as to cite things you were not punished for. Example: Falsely punished from game 1? Riot will cite game 2 and uphold their judgement. > My bad days will take the form of me just DC'ing from the game That is why you would likely not receive punishment. Also, what people hate about this system. Your team has no recourse for you leaving a game. Whereas, someone saying bad things can easily be muted.
>Then how is a person supposed to counter Riots claims? Just speaking for myself here. But if I was claiming that I didn't deserve a punishment and someone else with authority came in and lied about what happened, I would then say they were lying and demand that they back up their claim. Even if my record is gone they still have something to back things up with. >That is why you would likely not receive punishment. I don't rage quit often and haven't at all in over 6 months. My last DC was because I forgot to take smite so my team just went for the remake. Best option there really. Nothing like looking at the loading screen and realizing you have ignite instead of smite. I did at one point work my way up to a 20 minute Leaver Buster. That really made me rethink my process in how I dealt with assholes in game and made me much more proactive with the mute futures. So, good job Leaver Buster, doing it's job.
mah1foo (EUW)
: It's even harder when he lies ~~weeks~~ one week after the thread. Maybe this was just unlucky, not saying he's done it before. But still, I'm lucky I still had the demo somewhere, else I wouldn't have been able to prove him wrong.
Dude, the game in question was on the 10th. It hasn't even been two weeks. And, honestly, if my entire argument was based on "defending" someone, you bet your ass I would've downloaded that game three seconds after receiving my punishment.
Awf Meta (NA)
: Well, counter evidence is very hard to provide in this game. Riot support says "practically any negativity can be punished". Who here among us has never been negative?
You can download your game and up load to Youtube. You can say, "You're lying. Show the post/pre game chat." You can make 4 separate posts on the PB boards shouting about how Riot banned you and then lied about it. That's just off the top of my head. The fact that this doesn't happen implies that lying about what happened in a game isn't a standard procedure. >Riot support says "practically any negativity can be punished". Who here among us has never been negative? Which is exactly why you have to have a history of negativity. Everyone has a bad day. My bad days will take the form of me just DC'ing from the game rather than flaming, but those are few and far between. I'm much more driven by spite and spite dictates that I try to win just to show that asshole flamer that we could. And I mute very quickly rather than sit and read the asshole flamer's flames. That and being bad enough at the game that I need to concentrate on playing and not chatting means I don't use the chat very often. So the formula is really player history+severity. One or two bad days won't hurt you unless you decide to rage and perhaps spew hate speech or encouragements to harm.
: yeah we will have to see if he addresses it. i have always trusted and respected riot tantrum too. but thats why this is so interesting! why do we trust him? on all of these cases it always has been riot tantrum's word against some kid who just got banned. and of course we take the rioter's word. but we have no way to verify it for ourselves. you assume this is his first time but for all we know he lies on lots of these cases. we have never had evidence one way or the other we just blindly trust him. for the first time we have solid evidence that we can look at ourselves. and the evidence is pointing strongly towards riot tantrum can not be trusted. if he lied on this case he has probably lied on others.
The thing no one really argues once Tantrum smites. Which lends credence to him not lying about punishments. If your entire argument is that you got punished for no reason and a Rioter comes in and lies you raise a ruckus about it. Instead people tend to go quiet or argue that "context" is needed. I don't think I've ever seen someone Tantrum smote accuse him of lying. Which is where his reputation was built. Riot Tantrum comes in, smites, and leaves. The OP quietly slinks off exposed for the things not being shown in the chat logs. Any one of these people could have argued or downloaded their game and uploaded it to Youtube. Again, not saying that Tantrum hasn't lied before and this is just the first time he's been found out. I am asking why this would be the first time someone presented counter-evidence. Everybody fucks up sooner or later, no one is perfect, hopefully Tantrum stops by to give his side.
: i thought of that too. he must have looked at the wrong game. that is the only explanation. except there are no other games of tryndamere vs darius in mah1foo's history and tantrum apparently was looking at the correct chat for the game. i really dont see how anyone could watch that game i just watched and honestly believe darius was intentionally feeding. so where does that leave us with occam's razor?
Until Tantrum weighs in we can only speculate. But, like I said, there are points where if you just jumped to Darius's death it could look like he was inting or running past the minion wave. In reality Darius was just choosing stupid spots to stand and wait (and maybe type in chat) and not warding, but if you're in a rush I can see not spending a full 25 minutes watching and just skipping to the relevant time stamps. There's also the possibility of Darius typing to his team that he was inting. We can't know unless Darius allows his chat to be released or someone on his team happens across the conversation, remembers the game, and chimes in. The simplest and most straightforward answer is still just human err. I can not fathom why Tantrum would throw away all of the good will and trust he's built on these boards over mah1foo. Again, doesn't mean it didn't happen, but it's not a logical thing for anyone to do.
: I need help regarding toxicity control
Anger is addictive in a lot of ways. It feels good to be angry. You can get a shot of adrenaline if you're really raging. Anger as a pattern is super easy to develop. Honestly, if it's the chat that's getting to you I'd say /muteall at the beginning of the match. You've got pings. I wouldn't, but you certainly can even tell you're team that you're muting and why. The important part is to stop yourself from getting angry to being with and it sounds like it's once someone starts flaming that you get angry. If you can't see the flames, you can't get angry at the flames.
: How about this, People who pay money should honestly get to talk how they want in chat and if someone doesn't like it there is a feature for that.
So we have two competing groups. Group 1: Pays money and doesn't want to see the chat abused because someone is having a temper tantrum. Group 2: Pays money and wants to have temper tantrums in the chat. These two groups are not compatible. Whatever Riot does they will probably lose one of these two groups. What is Riot to do? Whatever action they take will result in the lose of a group of people paying money. The obvious answer is to determine who pays **more** money. Go with how the Pays More Money Group wants things to be in the chat and, optimally, turn members of Pays Less Money Group into members of the Pays More Money Group. Based on the way Riot handles toxicity in chat it would appear that Group 1 is also the Pays More Money Group. Cry all you want, but Riot is most likely listening to the Pays More Money Group as that makes good business sense.
: How do you appeal a chat/honor restriction
Unless you were extremely toxic in the games you were reported in it was probably more than one or two games. Post your chat logs and we can help you figure out where exactly the tipping point was.
: Or people can be fucking civilized and understand how the fucking system works. If you call "mid" first, you get mid. That doesn't mean "fuck you viktor im going mid anyways, have fun sucking my dick".
Blind pick has a generally agreed upon system of calling lanes. But I've certainly been in enough games with duo top and no jungler, even long past when this should be an accepted meta. It's pretty common to have kill lane in bot instead of ADC + Support. I see people play Yi or Xin mid all the time. Blind pick is a dirty, messy, free-for-all, that is anarchy at it's finest. I really like it personally. I think it's a fun way to learn to role with the various things that can be thrown at you in League. If I have strong feeling about what lane I want to play I play draft. Yeah, it can suck when you're low enough that you don't enough champs for draft. But you can always play bots or Aram or TT to level up and get enough BE to buy up the 450 champs. You're not forced to play Blind.
: Blind pick needs some sort of fucking ruling where if you call your lane, you get it.
Well, if you got a 14 day ban you did some bad things on your end. Just mute them, play the game, and report after. I'm sorry, it is blind pick. Sometimes you get 5 people all calling support and sometimes you get mid taken out from underneath you and have to figure out how to play Heimer support without stealing too much CS. These things happen. Take it as an opportunity to try your champ in a different lane.
mah1foo (EUW)
: One last follow-up for the "punished for defending Darius" with video proof of him not inting
Starting off by saying my opinion on your ban hasn't changed. You deserved it based on your chat alone, accept that and move on with your life. As for this replay I think it's a great example of why it's so hard to detect most inting. After watching it I do think he feed you a few kills and was not playing to help his team in all situations. Now whether that was because he was tilted, bad player, or whatever I don't know. I do think when Tantrum said he "ran past the minions" he was potentially referring to the time Darius stood next to the river, past the minion wave, and essentially did nothing to stop you from killing him. As for Tantrum there are a couple of options: 1. Tantrum lied and made up things. I'm actually very skeptical about this because Tantrum's reputation is so solid on these boards. I'm not sure why he would throw that away over you. Frankly, you're not worth it. 2. Tantrum is human, busy, does this in his spare time, and simply made a mistake. Perhaps he watched the wrong game. Perhaps he was skipping ahead to when Darius was killed and missed that Darius would clear a wave and then wait for his wave to catch up, thus looking like he'd run ahead of it. 3. Tantrum looked at Darius's chat (which he can't share with us) and Darius straight up told his team he was inting and see above regarding just skipping to when Darius died. I'm leaning towards an honest mistake. Ruining his reputation over you doesn't make sense. You're nothing in the grand scheme of things and Tantrum's reputation is the final word on disputes here. It would be stupid. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, but it doesn't make any fucking sense. I'm inclined to believe human err over malicious intent myself. It makes more sense, Occam's Razor and all that.
: What do you think?
You only need one report for the IFS to check out a game. Look, you can submit a support ticket, but honestly if this got you a chat ban? You were already almost there. If this is standard chat for you, you've probably been building up small amounts of reports for a bit and this was the last one to push you over. Death by a thousand paper-cuts basically. Low level toxicity isn't as flashy, but it still gets you there. Although >ItsNiceToMeetYou: What is your native language, i can translate it. has racist connotations. I don't think you meant it that way, but it could be viewed that way. Just saying.
Novel (NA)
: Just got Permaban
Technically Riot gave you four chances. 1 - initially set up account 2 - 10 game chat restriction 3 - 25 game chat restriction 4- 14 day ban If you can't sort things out after four chances that's on you. Riot is a business and it's not in their interest to keep people around who aren't fixing their behavior. Better luck on your next account.
: Who I overall hope to be mentioned may be{{champion:82}} {{champion:36}} {{champion:25}} {{champion:10}} {{champion:82}} because he's one of those champs I really like from many perspectives but just can't fully get into playing with how he is right now. {{champion:36}} was a champ I played a bit for some time until I just lost fun with him and realized that there were just better options to play, especially since his whole thing is healing and that gets countered pretty hard by GW on a number of items {{champion:10}} & {{champion:25}} because I swear they're the last VGU's that we're getting this year along with Akali, Aatrox, and Nunu _Runner Ups_ {{champion:32}} {{champion:31}} {{champion:9}} {{champion:96}} {{champion:54}} {{champion:56}} {{champion:80}} {{champion:72}} {{champion:23}} {{champion:62}} {{champion:106}}
I want {{champion:10}} and {{champion:25}} to get updates just so I don't have to listen to 'an eye for an eye' and 'I'll have my revenge' for 20 minutes straight when playing them.
: New Ban: Not using poro biscuits on Howling Abyss
On one hand I agree. On the other hand if everyone feeds the poros they won't tell me when people are hiding in the bushes.
: I was mostly joking about support - it was the closest thing I could think of to community service in regards to League. I like the support role, actually. What would be the League of Legends equivalent of 'picking up the trash on the side of the freeway' ?
I don't think there is a good equivalent. But I also don't think there should be. The only things I could think of would involve putting innocent people with proven to be toxic people. Unless there was some way to open source bot identification without being in games with bots. Which I don't think there is and I don't know if it would be worth the effort of developing if there was. Perhaps something where you're handed anonymous chat logs and have to identify which lines are toxic before being able to queue for X number of games? Thus forcing people to identify toxic behavior before joining a new game. Potentially just makes them even more likely to rage though. League just has so much interaction with other people that it's hard to do anything like community service without punishing other people.
: Community service might fall under positive action punishments. Maybe there should be 5 punishment tiers: 5 Game Auto-Filled Support (Community Service - the job nobody wants) 10 Game Chat Restriction 25 Game Chat Restriction 14 Day Suspension Permanent Ban
>5 Game Auto-Filled Support (Community Service - the job nobody wants) Not everybody plays Ranked or even Draft mode. Not everyone has a problem with Support. Some of the most toxic people I've played with have been supports. You're punishing the other, presumably innocent, people by sticking them with someone who doesn't want a position, knows it wasn't random chance they were given it, and has already shown themselves to be toxic.
: Again, your question is was faulty. You asked my opinion on murder, not on the death penalty. I, personally, do not believe the death penalty serves a purpose. It is a negative action with no positive outcomes and a great potential for further harm towards innocent people. My opinion on this does not change based on my personal connection to the person being sentenced to death. As it should not. Punishment should be objective not subjective. This is still a faulty question though as my opinion on the death penalty has nothing to do with my opinion on murderers. A better question would be: Is the act of punishing a murderer a negative, positive, or neutral action? My answer would depend on the punishment, but ideally the act of punishing a murderer would be positive for society as a whole. Thus, I do believe punishing murders is a positive thing to do.
Finally a properly phrased question. Perhaps you should update your post with examples of what you want? Might lower the amount of confusion in the thread. Neutral for all.
Awf Meta (NA)
: Is the act of execution a negative, positive, or neutral action? Does the person being executed change your answer? ex·e·cu·tion the carrying out of a sentence of death on a condemned person.
Again, your question is was faulty. You asked my opinion on murder, not on the death penalty. I, personally, do not believe the death penalty serves a purpose. It is a negative action with no positive outcomes and a great potential for further harm towards innocent people. My opinion on this does not change based on my personal connection to the person being sentenced to death. As it should not. Punishment should be objective not subjective. This is still a faulty question though as my opinion on the death penalty has nothing to do with my opinion on murderers. A better question would be: Is the act of punishing a murderer a negative, positive, or neutral action? My answer would depend on the punishment, but ideally the act of punishing a murderer would be positive for society as a whole. Thus, I do believe punishing murders is a positive thing to do.
Awf Meta (NA)
: > I have directly answered the question presented to the best of my ability, but as I don't believe you can say the act of issuing a punishment is always and objectively negative, positive, or neutral I am left attempting to explain why I believe that. I'll make this super simple for you. Is the act of murder negative, positive, or neutral? ( If you answer "depends", then the next question must be answered with "yes".) Does the person being murdered change your answer?
Murder isn't a punishment though. You have fundamentally changed the question.
Awf Meta (NA)
: > But, you found your soundbite and that's really all you care about. All I really care about is your opinion. You won't answer the questions directly though, so I have to guess. I apologize for guessing. > You're focused on the act and not the end result. Correct. > Punishment isn't about the act of punishing, it's about the desired result. Sure, but the action of punishment is not irrelevant. There are factors that influence the effectiveness of the punishment. The severity of the punishment being one of them. > Also, as described above, positive and negative punishment actually do have a meaning. Riot uses both of them. I'd rather not confuse the questions even more. I asked whether you consider the specific actions as positive, negative, or neutral.
My opinion is that you're question is faulty. I can not answer it the way you want me to because I believe you're not asking a good question. I have directly answered the question presented to the best of my ability, but as I don't believe you can say the act of issuing a punishment is always and objectively negative, positive, or neutral I am left attempting to explain why I believe that. >Sure, but the action of punishment is not irrelevant. There are factors that influence the effectiveness of the punishment. The severity of the punishment being one of them. Severity is very important. As I attempted to demonstrate above even the most minor of infractions can result in severe punishments if they go on long enough without correction. The lady refused to park in the correct location and this resulted in an escalation of punishment that could have potentially lead to her being fired. Or the company no longer stepping in to keep her car from being towed, but we didn't want our neighbors to be put in the position of having to do that. A very minor thing lead to a major punishment after a period of time. Within the realm of Riot and League of Legends this would be the minor chat infractions that eventually lead to a permanent ban. Does it objectively look silly? Yes, yes it does. But a refusal to fix behavior after being given warnings, reminders, and minor punishments will have to result in larger punishments. After being told what needed to be corrected and the steps to do so the onus is then on the person committing the acts to change their behavior. So, like the person that simply changes what insults they use, the lady with the parking problems would just change where she parked. Neither of them ever fixed the underlying behavior that was causing the problem. Thus why punishment was escalated to what would appear to be a stupid level for the infraction.
Awf Meta (NA)
: > Regardless of who the punishment was distributed to the net result would ideally be positive. Results are irrelevant. > I don't personally enjoy issuing punishments so it's never a positive for me personally. I think this is as close as you are going to get to answering the questions. You think the act of issuing punishment is a negative action. Your answers did not change depending on who you were punishing.
No, that's not what I said. I should have perhaps phrased that slightly differently. But, you found your soundbite and that's really all you care about. I, personally and emotionally, find the act of issuing a punishment distressing due to my own issues with confrontation. This is presumed punishment between equals as I have no issue dealing out punishment to children. How else are they to learn that they can't throw toys at their brother's head? I do not find punishments to be inherently positive or negative. Many people in this thread have offered some real world examples, but let me give you one more. At my previous job there was a lady who refused to park in the employee lot. No idea why, she would never give a good reason. She would park in the street which was clearly marked as No Parking. She would park in the visitor lot. Eventually she started parking in the neighbor's lot. At each point we had addressed the fact that she couldn't park where she was parking and that there was a place for employees to park. Eventually we were forced to write her up. I had to sit down with her and have her sign a formal reprimand about parking. Everyone in the office thought this was ridiculous. The only difference was that she thought it was ridiculous that we were one step from firing her about where she parked her car. The other manager and myself that it was ridiculous that her refusal to park in the correct spot was now causing problems with our neighbors and potentially the police if it wasn't resolved. The conversation and getting her to sign the paper could be seen as negative. The situation leading up to this was most definitely a negative. But the end result was a positive because she parked in the employee lot from then on. Again, your premise is faulty. You're focused on the act and not the end result. Punishment isn't about the act of punishing, it's about the desired result. Removing the result from the equation is working in bad faith. Also, as described above, positive and negative punishment actually do have a meaning. Riot uses both of them.
Awf Meta (NA)
: It's not that hard? If you were the individual that gave some one a punishment, is that act of punishing positive, negative, or neutral? If you were the individual that gave "a loved one" punishment, is that act of punishing positive, negative, or neutral? Did your answer differ between those 2 questions?
>It's not that hard? The rest of this thread would suggest otherwise. >If you were the individual that gave some one a punishment, is that act of punishing positive, negative, or neutral? >If you were the individual that gave "a loved one" punishment, is that act of punishing positive, negative, or neutral? >Did your answer differ between those 2 questions? Regardless of who the punishment was distributed to the net result would ideally be positive. I don't personally enjoy issuing punishments so it's never a positive for me personally. Being put into a situation where I have to deal out punishment is a distressing situation for me. Thus, for me, the act of giving punishment is negative, being put in a situation where someone is acting in a way that will result in punishment is a negative, but ideally not being in that situation in the future (due to the punishment) will be a positive. Now, baring well discussed situations between consenting adults, punishment is not a pleasant experience for the people on the receiving end. It would be negative because at the time they are not enjoying themselves. Long term though it would be a positive as the person would correct their behavior. Again, I think your premise is faulty. You're trying to take a complex issue and distill it into a soundbite without taking into consideration all of the factors involved. You're also very clearly trying to twist things to your predetermined conclusion.
: That's the thing, this isn't low level. I've been playing Aram for a year, and as I said these aren't standard bot accounts. One I just played with last night was Diamond last year, and gold this year.
I don't know, I'm just barely high enough to avoid bots myself. If I go on a big lose streak I tend to hit a bunch of bot games. That being said I haven't dealt with them recently. Could the ability to get free skins mean that bots are starting to unlock them? If you're not getting the A Player Has Disconnected/Reconnected announcements my guess would be either a new form of bots or people just being shits on ARAM. Either way I guess just report them. I haven't see these myself./
Awf Meta (NA)
: > I assume you mean something like: I forcibly removed my loved one from my life. I wouldn't go that far. People can create a new account. Suspensions are not actually "removed the game from your life". Regardless, I would appreciate it if you participated instead of trying to argue.
Okay, again, if I'm understanding your premise correctly I think the entire thing is faulty. At the very least you need to clarify how you think the 'game' should be played. No one is getting it. At this point the failure in communication is on your end. Edit: I did participate to the best of my ability and understanding of what you were trying to present. I answered each section with how it could be applied to my loved ones. As for the positive, negative, or neutral I believe this is where people are confused. Are you referring to the punishments? The end goals? The players? The actions that lead to punishment? Perhaps if you provided an example of what you're looking for?
Awf Meta (NA)
: Have you ever considered punishment without context?
This thought exercise is based on a faulty premise. I am not Riot's loved one. Because Riot Games is a company and not a person. Riot is beholden to the people spending the most money and ideally the people they can entice in to spend money. People who have happy and positive gaming experiences spend more money. They also tell their friends about this awesome game to play and spend money on. Thus, creating the happiest and bestest gaming experience possible will most likely result in more money. Now, for your "loved one" comparison. >I forced a loved one to wait without interaction. I forced a love one to stare at a timer. Were you never told to go sit in the corner as a child? Usually for a period of time? Where the point was that you could only sit and stare at the corner rather than, say, screaming at your sister? Have you never been so mad at someone you just couldn't talk to them for a period of time? Had an argument and decided that taking a cool down period would be a good idea because if you said anything it would probably lead to you saying something you couldn't take back? >I forcibly limited the amount of times a loved one could speak. I also forcibly forbid them from speaking to others. I'd like to believe that I'm not the only person who has ever told anyone that they weren't allowed to speak to me in a demeaning/rude manner. How about, again, punishment for children? If you can't interact with your sister nicely then you don't get to talk to her at all? >I forcibly removed a loved one from the game. I then forcibly forbid them from returning to the game. I assume you mean something like: I forcibly removed my loved one from my life. I'm glad you've never been in the position to cut off all contact with a loved one, but it does happen. Sometimes for your own health you need to just remove someone from your life. Sometimes there can be a reconciliation, but don't hold your breath if it's reached that point. I'm not sure what your goal is with these comparisons. Presumably to show how "unfair" they are or something, but again, you're not comparing the correct things. Of course you treat a loved one differently than Riot treats the players. They are two completely different things.
: Lets have an adult discussion about this report system.
How about this: People who pay money don't want to deal with children who think it's edgy or some shit to flame people. Honestly if the people I mute talk like that in everyday life I worry about them. That is not how emotionally healthy people talk to other people.
: Found Boosters. Riot Won't Punish.
Aren't boosters handled like bots, scripters, and the like? A big sweep every so often to catch everyone, but it doesn't let people know how they were caught. Thus keeping Riot's detection functioning longer as people can't find ways around it. I wouldn't worry about it. You reported them. They'll be caught and punished. You can see proof with the people who are stupid enough to come to the boards and cry about being perma banned for "no reason".
KCentra (NA)
: Honors... confused
I just recently hit the first checkpoint on Honor 3. I believe that honor was accelerated last season because it was introduced so late. It's supposed to be a season long climb so it makes sense that it's taking longer now that we have more than like 2 months.
: Has anyone seen this type of player in ARAM recently?
Low level aram has bots. Nothing new. You just have to play a lot to get matched with people above where the bots can reach.
: Is SEXUAL HARASSMENT OK TO RIOT
Mute and report. All you can do. It is a sad fact of life that admitting you're a girl playing video games still makes the dudebros of the internet think they can harass you. This despite the fact that several studies say that more women than men are playing video games these days. You have two options really. Change your username to something more gender neutral or fight the good fight if you have the mental and emotional energy. But, just remember, that even if you do decide to fight the good fight you're still responsible for your actions and will be susceptible to punishment if you retaliate against the asshats. I'm gonna be honest with you. I not only went the gender neutral route. I also purposefully chose a new name to use when playing League. I operate under different names almost everywhere else on the internet where I'm much more comfortable being identified as female. So, you do you. Figure out what you have the energy for and own that decision. But, mute, report, and don't engage.
: what did i say that was an insult? i called the guy silly and annoying as he was flaming me in all chat lol, if thats seriously toxic then people need to grow the fuck up and go outside. As for blaming, the person i was "blaming" was my duo partner who was openly agreeing with me.
> TTibbersFTW2022: cant help you TibbersFTW2022: cant TibbersFTW2022: cant TibbersFTW2022: because you were a lost cause TibbersFTW2022: dude TibbersFTW2022: stop talking TibbersFTW2022: you're annoying >TibbersFTW2022: you're a silly man >TibbersFTW2022: fiddle gave my lane two kills how is this my fault >TibbersFTW2022: gg wp report ornn, flaming me legit all game TibbersFTW2022: no, your skewed toxic mindset where you shit talk team mates, Is flaming. Like I said it's not overly toxic and probably was not the sole reason for punishment being triggered. That being said you need to remember that there are other people reading the chat besides your friend. Did the complete strangers in the game know you were friends? Also if you're duo partner was agreeing with you chances are it was a combination of the two of you cluttering up the chat with useless stuff that got people to report you. Or it looks like you called for reports in all chat. There's a small possibility that someone on the other team reported you for nothing more than that. Whatever it was you did have some mildly toxic chat. I do think that there was probably more than just this that contributed to your ban. I'd say submit a support ticket. Was there anything in the pre or post lobby chat? The IFS will take that into consideration even if it can't currently include it with your report.
: you think my chat log is punishment worthy? I was being verbally attacked by my top laner the entire game when my duo partner gave my lane two kills early. If they seriously think that my chat log is punishment worthy then im done playing this game, No point trying to play a safe space simulator.
You're responsible for your own behavior. Other people's don't come into consideration. Something you should have learned by now, but hopefully you'll figure that out if you decide to make a new account. Mute, report, move on. You blamed your team and were insulting. I'm not saying it was super toxic, but it was mildly. Unfortunately at the punishment tier you'd reached you only need to be mildly toxic in order to move up. That being said there probably were more things taken into consideration, other games the IFS wasn't able to add to your report. You can send in a support ticket for more information.
: its alright, i just got perma banned for this TibbersFTW2022: >.> TibbersFTW2022: tfw you pick zed and the guy who traded you is a zed main TibbersFTW2022: the pressure is on TibbersFTW2022: i fat fingered TibbersFTW2022: my fucking TibbersFTW2022: w TibbersFTW2022: im so sad TibbersFTW2022: hey man TibbersFTW2022: me losing lane TibbersFTW2022: isnt my fault TibbersFTW2022: oh TibbersFTW2022: i didnt miss TibbersFTW2022: ?? TibbersFTW2022: i hit both q's TibbersFTW2022: i misclicked my w TibbersFTW2022: i misclicked TibbersFTW2022: my w TibbersFTW2022: what part of that TibbersFTW2022: didnt you read TibbersFTW2022: oh yeah lemme predict my finger hitting the key by mistake TibbersFTW2022: nice advice TibbersFTW2022: buddy TibbersFTW2022: what would you run on zed if not precision though? TibbersFTW2022: is coup de grace not good? TibbersFTW2022: really? TibbersFTW2022: how? TibbersFTW2022: shouldnt it synergize with his ult? TibbersFTW2022: yeah? so level 6 cheese TibbersFTW2022: cant help you TibbersFTW2022: cant TibbersFTW2022: cant TibbersFTW2022: because you were a lost cause TibbersFTW2022: dude TibbersFTW2022: stop talking TibbersFTW2022: you're annoying TibbersFTW2022: for what TibbersFTW2022: im not inting TibbersFTW2022: nor am i toxic TibbersFTW2022: so good luck with that TibbersFTW2022: lol TibbersFTW2022: real reasons TibbersFTW2022: would be neat TibbersFTW2022: lol TibbersFTW2022: you're a silly man TibbersFTW2022: not even my fault TibbersFTW2022: but ok TibbersFTW2022: fiddle gave my lane two kills how is this my fault TibbersFTW2022: what? TibbersFTW2022: i ulted trist TibbersFTW2022: are you crazy TibbersFTW2022: yes TibbersFTW2022: i did TibbersFTW2022: .. TibbersFTW2022: i ulted trist TibbersFTW2022: did i not TibbersFTW2022: ok you're blind TibbersFTW2022: watch replay TibbersFTW2022: clear it TibbersFTW2022: just let jinx farm waves and we can win tbh TibbersFTW2022: unlucky TibbersFTW2022: we have more gold an xp income currently TibbersFTW2022: because of the waves constantly in our base TibbersFTW2022: gg wp report ornn, flaming me legit all game TibbersFTW2022: no, your skewed toxic mindset where you shit talk team mates, Is flaming. TibbersFTW2022: GG WP Apparently i was extremely toxic in this game and my behaviour is unacceptable. What a world eh?
Well, by the looks of things you just got off your 14-day ban. So, punishment worthy chat becomes a permanent ban.
Dirkster (NA)
: Just got perm banned.
Well, you were told on your 14-day ban that any further infractions would result in a permanent ban. Not sure why you're surprised. Clicking the I Understand button under the message explaining this was your final wake up call.
SWATCOLE (NA)
: Riot should consider revising their "zero tolerance on homophobic slurs" policy. Here's why.
There are a lot of things I could say here, but I'll keep it short and simple. I'm interested in why you think my identity is something you can use for casual insults. I don't think that's okay and I would like to know why you do.
mah1foo (EUW)
: (Follow up 2) So Tantram leaves one irrelevant comment and that's it, case closed?
This is your third post on this topic. First I'm responding to. I'm gonna say my piece and then leave. If I had been in that game with you I would have 100% reported you. The reason would have been for not playing the goddamn game. If you have enough time to post 60+ lines of text in the chat during the course of the game, averaging every 30 seconds as you stated elsewhere on the thread, you are not playing the game. You are making the game painfully more difficult for your teammates to play. You are taking up the chat with your endless arguing. I have no idea how your team would have been able to communicate with each other over your noise. You may have been "defending" someone, but that doesn't excuse the effect you had on other people as a result. And, honestly, with the lengths you went to I'm not convinced you were in it to defend anybody. It honestly just looks like you wanted to argue and you found a good excuse to do so. If you had honestly been concerned about the Darius's feelings the best solution would be to make sure that Darius had muted them and then got on with the game. Because that would have been the best thing for Darius. Now to demonstrate my point that sometimes the best thing to do is say your piece and move on, I shall be doing that.
: Aurelion Sol Doesn't Say Boop Enough
It really makes my entire League existence when Aurelion Sol kills someone while saying boop. It's perfect and I love it. Yes, more boop.
Lumiose9 (NA)
: Report People Who Surrender?
Just surrendering isn't punishable. I think, and Riot is free to clarify here, that the giving up option is for the people who just stop trying early in or spam the FF vote even if the rest of the team wants to keep trying.
: I abuse the reporting system
Considering false reports do nothing, go ahead. Have fun.
: Counterpoint: why are you so fragile that you get mad enough to tell some one to die?
Sometimes I just feel sad for these people. How much must it suck to go through life so sensitive that you tell people to die over a video game?
xBallu (EUW)
: 14 Day Suspension
I'm gonna throw this out there and I want you to really think about it. Someone on your team reported you unless you said it in all chat. There is a distinct possibility that one of your friends is very much not okay with you using that word. Perhaps you should have an open and honest discussion with your friends about this.
Eedat (NA)
: How much bullshit are YouTubers allowed to get away with exactly?
Send a ticket to player support with links to the videos? The people in the games with this person may not know that this is happening unless he announces it in all chat at the beginning of each game. Riot can't watch every single video uploaded to Youtube after all. And with the change in how ads work they can't even look for certain title or something.
: > [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tBa5VZ0r,comment-id=000000010000,timestamp=2018-03-09T07:07:03.689+0000) > > I didn't realize 4 years ago when people were getting longer near permanent chat bans was alpha, hm. Not sure what near permanent means to you, but I worry for your sanity if 25 days counts.
> [{quoted}](name=Declovone,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tBa5VZ0r,comment-id=0000000100000000,timestamp=2018-03-09T10:52:07.868+0000) > > Not sure what near permanent means to you, but I worry for your sanity if 25 days counts. I believe they're referring to when Riot used to just add onto the existing chat restriction. This would result in people banned for thousands of days and no hope of ever being unbanned. Effectively a permanent chat ban.
: > [{quoted}](name=swordofsun,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tBa5VZ0r,comment-id=00060000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-08T20:40:14.673+0000) > > Answer me this: If restricting chat resulted in an increase in toxic behavior how would a chat ban be different? Would it not just make people rage quicker? The increase in toxicity was in behavior, inting and trolling in game, not in the few lines of chat they were allowed. > > As far as I know Riot has not released any data sets that they base these things off of, just stats here and there. I really wish Riot Tantrum would do a big post delving into all this. What we do know is they had a huge data set to work with. Years of gameplay and punishments and millions of players. Just the sheer amount of information they had to dig through needs to be taken into consideration. They are probably constantly adding to it as well. Whatever we see in game is only a small, small, tiny, part of the data Riot has access to. Again, I do wish they'd release some of the more nitty gritty stats. I think it would be helpful. > > Personally I'd rather have a flamer in game than an inter. I can mute and report the flamer. Chat restriction still gives players the opportunity to 'wind up' into full blown flaming toxicity or start their initial bout of toxicity in chat first and then move on to other things. This 'winding up' is usually done in less than 5 lines of chat. So a chat restriction would be nowhere near as effective as a ban. In my personal experience, at least 8/10 cases of toxic behavior resulted because a player responded to the initial aggressive statement. I believe it was also stated by a rioter that if a player never responds to any provocation in chat it reduces the total toxic behavior in the game. I also believe that a reasonable number of toxic behavior results out of people expressing themselves in chat with things like "group up" which then go ignored, which results in a build up of frustration and ultimately toxic behavior. So without those initial triggers and reactions I believe for the most part that a very sizeable chunk of players would just cease being toxic. Anecdotally I'm 100% positive it would fix my friends who are super toxic. Outside of that I don't believe the number of players who do start resorting to other means would be all that significant, because people are generally not willing to throw games when their elo is on the line without getting really worked up first. But yes totally 100% agreed. If a rito posted some actual relevant information about this topic, they could put it to bed forever. Outside of that I can only apply logical reasoning and my own personal experience as well as similar social experiments.
> [{quoted}](name=Huang Shaotian,realm=OCE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tBa5VZ0r,comment-id=000600000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-08T21:01:36.458+0000) > > Chat restriction still gives players the opportunity to 'wind up' into full blown flaming toxicity or start their initial bout of toxicity in chat first and then move on to other things. This 'winding up' is usually done in less than 5 lines of chat. So a chat restriction would be nowhere near as effective as a ban. > > In my personal experience, at least 8/10 cases of toxic behavior resulted because a player responded to the initial aggressive statement. I believe it was also stated by a rioter that if a player never responds to any provocation in chat it reduces the total toxic behavior in the game. > > I also believe that a reasonable number of toxic behavior results out of people expressing themselves in chat with things like "group up" which then go ignored, which results in a build up of frustration and ultimately toxic behavior. > > So without those initial triggers and reactions I believe for the most part that a very sizeable chunk of players would just cease being toxic. Anecdotally I'm 100% positive it would fix my friends who are super toxic. > > Outside of that I don't believe the number of players who do start resorting to other means would be all that significant, because people are generally not willing to throw games when their elo is on the line without getting really worked up first. > > But yes totally 100% agreed. If a rito posted some actual relevant information about this topic, they could put it to bed forever. Outside of that I can only apply logical reasoning and my own personal experience as well as similar social experiments. And, unfortunately, without that hard data we are at an impasse. We only have notoriously unreliable and inaccurate ways of getting information. Anecdotal evidence is some of the worst stuff to go by after all.
: > [{quoted}](name=swordofsun,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tBa5VZ0r,comment-id=000600000000,timestamp=2018-03-08T20:29:54.405+0000) > > You should really title your posts what your actually arguing. I'm not even sure what you're arguing at this point. > > There is a very set line of bans and less than 1% of the people issues punishments ever work their way up to a perma ban. If you're arguing for increasing chat restrictions those were tried and they didn't work. People just found other ways to be toxic, such as inting or trolling in game. The 10 and 25 game restrictions were deemed to be both strong enough to show that Riot really meant it and short enough that people didn't start feeding in game. Riot Tantrum has a post about it somewhere around here. It's actually already quoted in this thread. I actually read the original thread around when it was posted too. The problem with that is they didn't say exactly how, or to what degree, or how often people started expressing their toxicity in other ways. And they also didn't try it with a chat BAN they did it with chat restrictions. Meaning people could still type occasionally in chat. Not a total ban.
> [{quoted}](name=Huang Shaotian,realm=OCE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tBa5VZ0r,comment-id=0006000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-08T20:33:40.350+0000) > > It's actually already quoted in this thread. I actually read the original thread around when it was posted too. The problem with that is they didn't say exactly how, or to what degree, or how often people started expressing their toxicity in other ways. And they also didn't try it with a chat BAN they did it with chat restrictions. Meaning people could still type occasionally in chat. Not a total ban. Answer me this: If restricting chat resulted in an increase in toxic behavior how would a chat ban be different? Would it not just make people rage quicker? The increase in toxicity was in behavior, inting and trolling in game, not in the few lines of chat they were allowed. As far as I know Riot has not released any data sets that they base these things off of, just stats here and there. I really wish Riot Tantrum would do a big post delving into all this. What we do know is they had a huge data set to work with. Years of gameplay and punishments and millions of players. Just the sheer amount of information they had to dig through needs to be taken into consideration. They are probably constantly adding to it as well. Whatever we see in game is only a small, small, tiny, part of the data Riot has access to. Again, I do wish they'd release some of the more nitty gritty stats. I think it would be helpful. Personally I'd rather have a flamer in game than an inter. I can mute and report the flamer.
: > [{quoted}](name=swordofsun,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tBa5VZ0r,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2018-03-08T19:33:06.278+0000) > > End of the day Riot perma banning someone is Riot saying they should find a different game to play. Riot doesn't actually have the resources to keep people from creating new accounts, but they can keep banning them. And they do, as you can see over on Player Behavior with with people who proudly proclaim their -th number of banned accounts. > > If anyone ever comes up with a good way to keep people from making new accounts that doesn't have the potential to harm a lot of innocent bystanders (like IP bans do) then I'm sure Riot would implement it. It's an imperfect system, but it's not designed to get people to spend more money. It's designed to get people to shape up or ship out. 100% agree, that's my whole point. Perma banning is useless. Chat banning will be more effective.
> [{quoted}](name=Huang Shaotian,realm=OCE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=tBa5VZ0r,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2018-03-08T19:33:57.559+0000) > > 100% agree, that's my whole point. Perma banning is useless. Chat banning will be more effective. You should really title your posts what your actually arguing. I'm not even sure what you're arguing at this point. There is a very set line of bans and less than 1% of the people issues punishments ever work their way up to a perma ban. If you're arguing for increasing chat restrictions those were tried and they didn't work. People just found other ways to be toxic, such as inting or trolling in game. The 10 and 25 game restrictions were deemed to be both strong enough to show that Riot really meant it and short enough that people didn't start feeding in game. Riot Tantrum has a post about it somewhere around here.
: Does KYS = instaban/chat restricted?
If this was post-game lobby the automated system doesn't catch it. It does have to be a manual review and those are backed up because they take longer. Be patient and don't dwell.
Show more

swordofsun

Level 51 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion