: > [{quoted}](name=i404notfound,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=rvfcWb46,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-04-08T05:01:58.010+0000) > >- Whats so hard about simply having a "competitive" section where reports for verbal abuse physicaly dont exsist >- then having a section for "4 fun" players who would rather selfishly play for themselves over their teammates Having a competitive spirit isn't the same as being verbally abusive. Like... at all. Being competitive is actually a healthy thing. Losing your shit when your team doesn't do well and establishing a pattern of abusive behavior toward your peers is **NOT** healthy. Abusive behavior is not and should not be excused just because you want to win **« «** *extra hard* **» »**. Players who want to use ranked as an excuse to be abusive don't deserve their own queue. They deserve to be removed from the community. Calling people who want to play a **GAME** ***for FUN*** *selfish* has got to be one of the most ass backwards pieces of logic I've seen in a long time. It is a video game. Its entire purpose is to be utilized for fun with the only exception being if your income and livelihood relies on you playing it as your job. Ranked exists for players of any skill to see where they fall on the ladder. That doesn't mean players should stop playing for fun just because a game counts towards their position on that ladder. You're not a professional. You're not master or challenger. You're silver. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. But don't act like players who want to play for FUN are somehow the reason people have bad games or that "for fun" players are impacting your income or livelihood. It's not. And you *selfishly* demanding a separate queue so you can be abusive without consequences is, quite frankly, hilarious.
Apparently it is wrong that I'm silver to you, since I have to be master or challenger in order to get teammates who actually want to win. I you really find "I just play for fun" ass backwards, ask anyone who intentionally feeds and incites poeple to get perma-banned for words. You know what their response will be? "it was fun" You cant say "lul if it's fun it's ok if it isnt it isnt". Thats like arguing good tasting food is good for your body. Looking past the more complex terms, you can use a SUBJECTIVE detail to get an OBJECTIVE result. You want people to have fun, the more you target the less fun each individual has. You want people to play well, you build a box and who ever fits in it is playing well all from challenger to bronze. But since I expect you to NOT abandon the "but MY fun is more important than ANYONE ELSE'S fun" standpoint, let me ask you this. Person A has fun playing the game to win, they dont have fun when others ruin their chance to win. Person B has fun playing the game "for fun", but doesnt have fun when others actualy try to win for any reason. Which of these people is WORSE? no "they are both just players", no "which ever is more toxic", YOU DEFINE which mindset is worse. Until you do I fail to see any argument I could have with such an insular mindset.
: Don’t use pictures without knowing the context. It’s made in response to Cowsep’s current issues with Riot Korea, centered in SOUTH Korea. The flag is a joke likening Riot KR to North Korea.
It's rather fitting given the totalitarian state they try to rule in.
: Then figure out an algorithm to figure out inters and trolls. Because there is no cookie cutter solution to it. We can't simply go "x deaths = int" even if we went "x deaths in y time = int" as soon as that knowledge gets out, they get better. And then only people actually having a bad game are getting punished. What about trolls? Riot won't impose a meta onto the community because we don't want one. So while they could get more obvious ones "ap zed" others would have to remain open "ad janna" "Taric Top". As for abilities what are you going ro do about TK, Anivia, and Trundle (I spose Taliyah too.) with eating/terrain. Maybe they were trying to help separate a teammate and close enemy. Am I to be punished because I was off a few pixels or whoever I ate spat themselves back out? Maybe it has been talked about since season 4, but it isn't exactly a simple thing to change, especially since we all have brains. It is also why chat/flamers get more chances before a perm ban might fall on them (pending escalation form 0 tolerance) and troll/inting starts with a 14 day ban. A recent thread? What about the Sion Ornn Mid guy? It got banned from trolling/griefing. Yes, it is a single case; but it shows that they are trying.
You can argue all you want about how hard it is, but it does nothing to justify how the current game is. Simply segregating the community into these two groups is more than enough. Everyone who isn't interested in winning goes on one side and get judged on their words and behavior. They all play with each other. The other side gets judged only by their play. blocking someone with anivia, as troll as it is, doesn't trash the game unless you do it all game. This BESIDES the fact that reviews on gameplay would be much more viable if you didn't have to judge walls of text. If your judged on gameplay then the report system could be tailored as such. It would be simple to report someone for troll build, have a look at their build, and determine from there. But instead you would rather mass ban people for words AND WORDS ALONE. Like do you know it's considered a casual sport now to get people banned by antagonizing them? I am well aware how hard it is to make a functioning anti-troll algorithm, but until that is set you shouldn't punish players for getting mad at YOUR OWN design failures. Again, the issue is not that the algorithm doesn't work so much that VICTIMS are getting punished via permaban. I would say innocent but you have a VERY different opinion on that word I would imagine.
: But riot does punish inters and trolls, it just takes longer to do so. by retaliating at them you become a flamer, which is also punishable. Youre no longer the "victim" at that point, but rather the aggressor. 2 wrongs dont make it right. Also a seperate queue like that is esentially the player opting into toxicity, which riot is strictly against in any way or form.
Check any recent thread about inting and trolls. Nothing is being done about it. We've heard the "algorithm is hard" statement since season fucking 4 now. If you dont look to solve the problem but instead look to ban everyone by labeling everything they could possibly do as "being the aggressor" how can you expect to get a better game? Toxicity is such a subjective thing that it NEEDS to be adjustible to different tastes. I hate having to play with people who dont care about winning but I'm unaffected by people who "verbal abuse". others hate "verbal abuse" while not being affected by intentional feeders. Why do BOTH of us get banned?
: It takes far more games to get banned for inting than I expected.
I wonder how many got perma-banned for "verbal abuse" due to the int feeder.
Comentários de Rioters
: Punishing 1 person for 1 thing does not validate everything else that is ever happening.
> [{quoted}](name=Automated Riven,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=YfXuOEc8,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-04-08T01:50:26.755+0000) > > Punishing 1 person for 1 thing does not validate everything else that is ever happening. it does when you straight ignore everything else and fail to enforce everything else.
Jo0o (NA)
: When you can't find a single person willing to agree with you, it might be time to consider that you've made an error in judgment.
> [{quoted}](name=FailedAbortion,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2018-03-14T13:45:33.502+0000) > > Chat wasn't the root cause. > > If Rumble was having a good game, mid wouldn't have said anything. (assumption, since it appears mid wasn't harassing bot lane) > > Some one should have physically helped Rumble. > > So, we have 2 actions that started the entire situation. > > 1. Rumble playing poorly. > 2. No one helping Rumble. > > What is the natural result of those 2 actions? > > If a player plays poorly and no one helps them. The enemy is going to be fed and is more likely to win the game. > > I'm not going to argue that the chat abuse was warranted. I will say though, even without the chat abuse, the game was already leaning towards a loss. Fix the root cause and the game would have been winnable. Prevent the root cause and the toxicity never would have happened. > [{quoted}](name=Operator3B,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-03-14T15:11:06.311+0000) > > based off what ive seen so far, it seems that the people on your team were inting and trolling and it made you angry. I understand why you got mad as you and/or a few other teammates got mad that hypothetically bot lane was inting or trolling for fun. I think its ok to get get mad and tbh i expect the trolls to be ready for that behavior. > > But, in the hypothetical case where bot lane was having a bad game and feeding UNINTENTIONALLY, it is NOT okay to flame them (especially in normals your not losing anything really). That deserves punishment if your get so angry you demoralize the team when they are only humans prone to error. Idk if the second case concerns your initial statement as I would need more specifics. > > But in the case it doesn't pertain to that situation, i think getting made is a natural reaction and you shouldn't get banned for flaming trolls. those are just the ones that post here. you were saying? on the otherhand, when several people try to argue your point for you and are all proven wrong, perhaps YOU should consider your judgement.
: This man is confused and angry
: > [{quoted}](name=i404notfound,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=zkHZmNKe,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2018-03-14T17:25:04.663+0000) > > Considering that insular logic and closed stance of the player behavior group, I'm not surprised by this opinion. You started by implying people could buy bans. No one is going to take you seriously.
: Honestly, if the way you act here is the way you act in game, it's not hard to see why you got banned.
Considering that insular logic and closed stance of the player behavior group, I'm not surprised by this opinion.
: >So here are the facts: you're on a 2-week ban; the next punishment is a permaban; if you don't improve your behavior, you won't have this account anymore. That being said, focusing on trolls or frankly anyone else's action isn't productive for you.
which is fucking cute but makes no headway for or against my point. Geeze even you are making the copy pasta "you are your own problem" posts when I'm not even complaining about the state of my account.
Chermorg (NA)
: I am done responding to you as you refuse to respectfully discuss this issue and attempt to read my posts. You are repeatedly making faulty assumptions and completely wrong accusations, and you refuse to accept that you are wrong in many of your assumptions. As such, there is absolutely no reason for me to attempt to continue explaining to you why you are wrong - because you'll never hear it. Good luck with whatever you decide to do after your suspension is over.
Are you a bot? cause you really seem to be using prefabricated posts to address points THAT STILL HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN MADE HERE. It's rather insulting that someone like you gets some special border to go parade around as if your official when you aren't even capable of reading comprehension. Go back to posting "you are your own problem just fix yourself" on other threads since thats all you seem to do.
AraMoOse (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=i404notfound,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2018-03-14T13:45:34.765+0000) > > cries about lying an exaggeration in a post filled with lying and exaggeration. I would make the kettle and pot reference but that would require admitting to something I haven't done. > > Asuming you actualy want to have a discussion: > > 1. It apparently is a crime Since Riot will perma-ban you for EXPRESSING what your angry about WITHOUT actualy doing anything to what made you angry. > > 2. Censoring words and permabanning people for using them is hardly reasonable, but sure they arent stapling a smile to my face I'll give you that. > > 3. I fail to see any way I can contextualize this into a relevant point. 1. It is not a crime to run in a school hallway. That does not mean you are allowed to do it or that you will not receive consequences. Your saying they are treating it as a crime is therefore an exageration. 2. The problem is not the words, as you know. The problem is verbal assault. I can say Fuck. I cannot say Fuck You. People do not get permabanned for using words unless those words are used to assault people. This argument is yet another exageration. 3. Your comment to another user that "Riot is putting you in jail" is what I was referencing. This was also an exageration, if not flat out a lie. So do you have any other arguments? Can you actually make your point honestly?
holy fuck it's another kid who doesnt know what a metaphor is. Here let me google it for you too METAPHOR: a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable. 1. Having just learned what a metahpor is if you arent feeling stupid about making this a point you might want to reread this thread. 2. The problem is the words because "why didnt top get ganks" is deemed unacceptable because it's an insult and NOTHING MORE according to Riot's enforcement bot and boards members. As if the words dont imply a question or a request. If you werent a special snowflake so insular you only saw surface value you would notice this. 3. really? two arguments are soly hinging on metaphors not existing? are you fucking serious?
: I feel like people have tried to give you some honest feedback about what you're complaining about, but without insulting you, despite what you've said back. The reason I pointed out that he's "not a rioter" is because you said: >I expect this sort of glossary generalization from unpaid forum mods but YOU should at least have SOME form professionalism and integrity to look at something fully before posting, particularly if your intent is beyond "silencing the complainer". And apparently you thought he had access to replays. He's a player, just like you and me, but with a dinky icon and the ability to moderate the forums. I will say that I side with most others that have commented here: that it's your behavior that you should be worried about, not others. I know you don't want to talk about your behavior, and when you have, you've mentioned that your behavior wasn't ok. So here are the facts: you're on a 2-week ban; the next punishment is a permaban; if you don't improve your behavior, you won't have this account anymore. That being said, focusing on trolls or frankly anyone else's action isn't productive for you. We've all had Renektons in our game, but there are worse and more frustrating players, and you need to think about what you'll do moving forward to avoid getting punished.
It's not whether he has access to information or not. It's his bullshit "I got a title so I will say WHAT YOU MEAN then RESPOND TO WHAT I SAID YOU MEAN" way of posting that I have an issue with, particularly when he doesn't even have access to the correct information to back his "corrections". He wants to fucking act like I'm crying about a suspension like this is a singular case when I NEVER asked for that. Apparently he's too busy playing got with his light blue border to look beyond what anyone else is typing.
Chermorg (NA)
: I have read you threads - please stop repeating the same sentences of that nature over and over, it makes it hard to read your comments here. >why is it acceptable to reward trolls and int feeder by banning the complainers long before ANYTHING is even PLANNED to be done about the actual int feeder/troll? Because, to be frank, your assumptions are wrong in this. 1. **Riot** isn't rewarding trolls by punishing you - you are rewarding trolls by doing punishable behavior. 2. Riot **does** punish intentional feeders and trolls, and while their intentional feeding detection needs some work (there have been false positives *and* false negatives) it **is** working okay now (but not as good as it could be). Your question **has no answer** because your question is fundamentally wrong - your question relies on assumptions that are woefully incorrect. Until you ask a question without those faulty assumptions in it, I can't really answer you in any meaningful way. ---- Now, the question you're *really* asking (to my understanding) without the faulty assumptions is: "Why does Riot punish people complaining but not the people who made the person complain in the first place?" To answer that, I will refer you to the other comments I've made, but I'll also summarize here: 1. You control your enter key. The troll, intentional feeder, or person you're mad at did not force you to type anything, and they could not have stopped you from typing it - it is simply not their fault that you decided to behave poorly. 2. The existence of other poor behavior has not, will not, and will never justify any form of poor behavior. Even if we accept your notion that in all games you flame you are met with trollers/intentional feeders (this is extremely unlikely to be the case), you *still* do not get to use that as justification for your flaming. 3. Riot **does** punish players who are actually intentionally feeding and/or trolling - you see them here on the Player Behavior boards decently often. The issue with that is that most players punished for trolling/intentionally feeding **know** they are wrong and so they never come to post about it here to complain - why would they complain if they knew they were wrong and broke the rules? This results in a vast underestimation of the number of trolls/feeders being punished. 4. But again - the number of trolls and/or intentional feeders is nowhere near as much as you try to make it out to be. There is no "promo rigging" or anything like that either. You are merely making excuses for your lack of self control in a heated situation in your promotional games.
This will be the 4th I'm asking to reread the thread. Again because your responding to points YOU THINK I'm making, not the points I'm ACTUALLY making. However, you've added "compressing a generalization into a singular personal case" and "making response to points that were never contested to the list". So since I have to hold your hand and yes, my patience for this is thinning since you seem to intentionally ignore my points, Lets start with the numbers. 1. This has NO PURPOSE IN THIS ENTIRE THREAD. Fan-fucking-tastic job posting information I already knew. This neither furthers nor denies my point, NORE does it advance the conversation in anyway other than derail it. THIS is ENTIRELY filler and pointless to be here. 2. I have at NO POINT said my behavior was acceptable. NOR have I stated I should be an acception to the rule. This is how I KNOW your NOT reading my posts because despite NEVER making this point you have RESPONDED TO IT IN EVERY POST YOU MADE HERE. I'VE GIVEN PLENTY TIME TO BE GENTLE ABOUT THIS SO OPEN YOUR FUCKING EYES. 3. ok, maybe you read CERTAIN words, but your not reading the entire sentence. I'm aware Riot punishes trolls and inters. I'm aware verbal abuse is punished as well. Are you aware the GIVEN THE SYSTEM IN PLACE RIGHT NOW WHEN THIS POST HITS THE BOARDS THAT VERBAL ABUSE IS OVERBEARINGLY ENFORCED WHILE INT FEEDING AND TROLLING IS LAUGHABLY LACKING IN EVEN SIMPLE DETECTION? This means your bot will happly ban hammer ANYONE who EVER complains about ANY trolling or inting in ANY context, meanwhile the majority of Inters/trolls go through your system untouched because you cant bother to see them. Yes I heard about false negatives and false positives, I get it. Does that ALONE justify this system REWARDING inters/trolls by building upon their damage by then BANNING the complainers? You continue to ignore and dodge this point deflecting to "you are the problem you need to fix yourself" copy pasta and "all toxicity is punished equally" while outright admitting that it isn't due to detection issues. Surely I don't have to explain how asinine that is. 4). Yet another filler point. Yes I clearly was talking in exact number of trolls and exact number of complainers and the exact number of each that get banned rather than drawing a SIMPLE FUCKING CONNECTION that a MASSIVE FAILURE to commonly detect trolling/inting coupled with a MASSIVE SUCCESS in detection words resulted in a system that REWARDS TROLLS/Inters by BANNING the complainers without punishing the inters. THIS isn't a hard math solution based on physical number data, this is a simple extrapolation from statements currently given. It really doesn't matter what you MEANT to build, because this IS what you built. The exact numbers don't matter SO LONG as the numbers DO NOT contradict already made statements. If you can provide hard data that PROVES that Inters/troll are being punished either equally AS OFTEN or MORE OFTEN with a 1 day ban or greater than verbal abuse then you'll not only have a point, you'll have FINALLY contributed. If you DON'T have access to that data and you DON'T have anything to add to the argument except this baseless filler that addresses NOTHING that I've posted, I fail to see why you are here. I ignored the top two points for the same reason I ignored point 1. READ THE POSTS BEFORE BLINDLY KEYBOARD CRUSADING FOR FUCK SAKE. I KNOW RIOT IS PUNISHING THE COMPLAINERS BEFORE THE CAUSE. I KNOW WHY RIOT IS PUNISHING THE COMPLAINERS BEFORE THE CAUSE. I AM ASKING WHY IS IT CONSIDER A "GOOD" STATE TO BE IN GIVEN THIS MASSIVE FLAW IN YOUR SYSTEM?
: No. I'm done. You can consider our opinions, you can ignore them, or in your case, change them to be something that's easier to attack. Feel free to continue to construct your strawman arguments if it makes you feel better, but the system will not change. I'll not be replying further.
I'm arguing theres a flaw in player behavior enforcement. your arguing that I need to change my behavior without even reading what my argument was. the fact that you literally ran out of generic "your the problem YOU need to fix yourself" posts before you figured out I was never arguing about my own actions is ENTIRELY on you. Dont cry that I didn't appease you when you had no applicable stand in the argument to begin with.
Chermorg (NA)
: I didn't say I watched your replays, I said I checked your match history. Bots don't watch replays, and honestly you can't expect humans to most of the time either. The bottom line is these "trolls" you are complaining about most likely do not exist in the numbers you are claiming. You expect others to go looking through your match history to find trolls, and I tried to and only found maybe 2 cases where someone *may* have been trolling, but it's nowhere near provable.
I do not expect others to look, I expect YOU to look since you think for some reason my ENTIRE argument is invalidated because I MIGHT not have experienced as many trolls you THINK i think i experienced. Any answer to that question does nothing to the current question of "why is it acceptable to reward trolls and int feeder by banning the complainers long before ANYTHING is even PLANNED to be done about the actual int feeder/troll?" "We're working on it" neither confirms nor denies this statement "you aren't having as bad an experience as you think" is ENTIRELY subjective and also has no application to the argument. This is why I am being so abrasive. you are blatantly ignoring the thread and instead replaying to what YOU assume I'm complaining about because it cannot possibly be anything new. This is why I asked to to ACTUAL read the threads. Now read them.
: He’s not a rioter. If there’s a red border, then that summoner is a rioter. Any other color is a forum moderator. He does not have the ability to review your games. If you want to have meaningful discussion, it’d be ideal if you stopped insulting everyone responding to your posts.
I have no reason to respect people who dont even read my posts, particularly when they suddenly try to cherry pick cases, whether it myself or otherwise, as a defense against a generalized argument. Chermong might get some fucking high for I all care by trying to throw random ass stats about myself at me but it doesnt address my argument since it's not applicable. It's the equivalent of quoting one business as a picture for the whole market. It doesn't apply because it doesn't scale.
Jo0o (NA)
: I'm just replying to you, dude. There's no strategy at work in how I respond on these boards. They're not the easiest to keep track through, you're right. I don't see that conversation with Djinn going anywhere. You keep insulting and putting words in Djinn's mouth. Just because it's a Herald's job to keep cool and polite with forum posters doesn't mean they're any more willing to entertain your view of events. Look dude, I'm a forum regular. This is a place I spend time on during luls in the work day, so I wind up seeing a bunch of folks complaining about their bans. Look at some other threads: You're in poor company. Folks that complain on here are almost always in the wrong, and it's VERY rare that you'll get any support from forum regulars when you're talking about a punishment you received. You want the respect and agreement of folks on these boards? You want people to take you seriously? Give us a reason to do so. You're citing a non-confrontational correspondence with Djinn as if it's some evidence that I'm not giving you a fair chance here, but shit, it's Djinn's job to talk to you like that. I'm an average dude. If your goal is to convince the average dudes, meet us half way by actually showing us chat logs and walking us through what happened, without all the hyperbolic assumptions about your supposed mistreatment. If that's not your goal... then I'm not sure why you're here. A support ticket would simply open a private channel of dialogue between you and a Riot employee and get you all the official responses about your situation as you desire.
holy fuck your so dumb. Why do you think is about a SPECIFIC CASE when I'm arguing about a core concept on riot's behavior enforcement. This like saying "freedom of speech is wrong" and you saying "but shit means poo". YOUR MISSING THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE THREAD. I am not interested in my personal situation. I am not looking for redemption of change of my PERSONAL situation. I am looking to get an answer to a serous flaw in player behavior enforcement. A flaw that perhaps I only see because I look beyond just myself, but a flaw seen non the less. Stop trying to derail this into personal maters.
: > [{quoted}](name=i404notfound,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=zkHZmNKe,comment-id=000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-14T15:51:18.514+0000) > > I'm currently having a conversation with a herald that is more than just "lul your the problem". > > Amazing what people can accomplish with non-insular thinking like "no ofc Riot isnt taking bribes but it sure is fishy that trolls get away scott free while the complainers are insta-punished" > > I have observed that actually thinking and taking more than just praise is difficult for you. But do try. > > I mean I'm not the one constantly starting new threads to throw off my opposition just so I can win the argument. > > Look at the thread with the herald and look at the others. If you'll note the herald actually picked up on what i was saying while the others, like you, saw ONE word they didnt like and assumed the rest wasn't worth processing. Mind if I jump in here? No, the system is not perfect. No, you are not, in cases of trolling, the only problem. But that doesn't mean you aren't a problem. Here's an example: Let's say someone is being rude in a restaraunt, shouting that the cook should be fired and harassing the waitresses. You see this and respond by clubbing the guy over the head with a centerpiece. Now, the other guy was wrong. But by attacking him, you became wrong too, and you are probably both going to get kicked out. And I understand your frustration about trolls. I really do. The system for punishing them is pretty inaccurate right now. But Riot is working to improve it, and the system that caught you is much easier to make, so it is better at the moment. But what you're saying is like 'there are murderers out there, so robbers should go free.'
No I don't mind you jumping in. Yes I do mind you NOT looking before you leap. Why does everyone think that explaining the system, regardless of how you reword it, suddenly makes it an acceptable system? Why does LITERALLY EVERYONE I TALK TO avoid the "it rewards trolls" portion? Like whats so fucking hard about saying "yes the system is flawed in when applied from this angle it does infact reward trolls"? I never argued that I was ok, yet eveyone seems to think I am. I never argued that I did nothing wrong, yet YOU are saying I did. What the fuck man? How hard is it to read a fucking thread?
: You can actually track when someone is verbally abusing someone through the system. There is a chatlog for all the games that makes this easy. For behavioral problems, it's difficult to track. You can't easily tell someone is feeding or trolling in game without human, manual review, or unless their games show a very, VERY distinct pattern through their KDAs. Both offenses, verbal and behavioral, are problems. One is easiest to punish and gather data one. One is not. Trolls utilize this uncertainty to get others in trouble. As with any troll ever known to man since the dawn of the internet, if you ignore them, it diminishes their enjoyment. If you don't let a troll trigger you into saying something that's reportable, or hell, if you don't acknowledge a troll at all in the game, it unsettles them, and allows you to get back at them. Don't fall for their traps, report them, and then send in a support ticket for a manual review. But don't scream at them and get super angry if it's going to result in you saying nasty things to them and getting reported by them.
Again, very good wording that out. Still not seeing a "this is perfectly acceptable and should be ever be complained about statement.
Chermorg (NA)
: I did read your entire post and all the comments, in fact. I determined that you're never going to be convinced that your punishment was appropriate, because you're focused more on whether or not someone *else* got punished. News flash, I looked through your match history and there were not any games in recent past that I saw obvious trolls in. If a **human** can't find them fast, I'm not sure how you expect a computer to do so. Or maybe, like others who are punished, you are complaining about trolls where they don't exist. Bad players are not trolls. People making stupid mistakes are not trolls. And players who make repeated mistakes are not trolls. The number of true trolls in the game is much **much** less than the number of times I see players complain or accuse trolling.
apparently not since you COMPLETELY ignored the other post I have. Perhaps consider actually looking instead of taking a quick glance at match history and using win loss rating as a judgement of "has he seen trolls recently." read chat logs, watch replays, investigate. It really does make you incompetent when you generalize me as "just more trash" when I'm making meaning full discussion so close by you would simply need to look at recent threads to notice. Nor does it do much to your credibility that you would have me believe you watched every second of every replay of every match I've ever had within 16 fucking minutes when a single games ATLEAST twice as long on average. This without mentioning chatlogs.
Jo0o (NA)
: Why wouldn't it be? You insinuate that the Renekton player bribed Riot to get you banned. You preemptively disregard anything a Riot employee or representative could do or say about your situation. You make a blanket assumption that the Renekton will not be punished for their actions. You refuse to offer any evidence whatsoever to back up any of your assertions. How about you tell ME what the appropriate response is? Because it sounds like you're extremely upset that your account got punished, and are blaming everything and everybody but yourself. Since none of that shit is even slightly under your control, the absolute correct action for you to take is to sit down, shut up, stop complaining, and fix yourself. Your account standing is entirely within your control. I stand by every word I said.
I'm currently having a conversation with a herald that is more than just "lul your the problem". Amazing what people can accomplish with non-insular thinking like "no ofc Riot isnt taking bribes but it sure is fishy that trolls get away scott free while the complainers are insta-punished" I have observed that actually thinking and taking more than just praise is difficult for you. But do try. I mean I'm not the one constantly starting new threads to throw off my opposition just so I can win the argument. Look at the thread with the herald and look at the others. If you'll note the herald actually picked up on what i was saying while the others, like you, saw ONE word they didnt like and assumed the rest wasn't worth processing.
: I've not insinuated that words are more impactful than actions, so I don't understand where you're pulling this from. All I've said are that words impact the game in negative ways, a concept which you think isn't true. Complaining about things in the game is useless - it doesn't solve any problems, it has the potential to aggravate and degrade someone's already declining mood, and only serves to make you feel better and no one else. Furthermore, if you're "complaining" in such a way that involves harassment or verbal abuse towards other players, that's not a complaint at all - that's you being a dick and claiming it's a complaint. You can complain without being a colossal dick, so if you're getting reported and punished for "complaining," chances are you're not doing so in a way that doesn't resort to insults or personal attacks. There are many ways to complain in the game. Here's an example of a good and a bad way. _Your midlane, Syndra, has just died the third time to Ryze._ _Ashe: Syndra needs to play under tower and not fight Ryze without the jungler._ This is a good way to complain about a player doing poorly. You're not attacking Syndra, but you're bringing to her attention that you see she's doing poorly against Ryze and you tell her how to stop playing poorly. You will not get reported for complaining like this. If you do, it will be a false report and it won't matter. versus _Ashe: This Syndra is garbage. Inting and feeding Ryze all game._ _Ashe: /all: Report Syndra for inting to Ryze._ This is a BAD way to complain, as you're only going to make Syndra angry, and cause her to respond to you with equal anger. This will cause a flame war, and Syndra will either throw the game harder because you've upset her, or she will actively not help you or others who support you in the chat out of spite. You probably will get reported for complaining like this. If you do, it will be a valid report and go against your record.
Lets read the opening post shall we? I'll put it right here for you? "It really boggles my mind that a competitive game such as this wants you be happy you were force fed a loss that you have NO control over to the extent of perma banning people who actualy want to play the game as a reward for those who want to ruin it for others." Now, since you've been busy literally restating yourself over and over trying to force a point that no place in this thread making no ground towards or against my point I'm going to ask you to look at the thread including the herald since he actually fucking read part of the post. The issue I have is that Verbal abuse is being punished far more harshly than int feeding and trolling, to an extent that it is literally functioning as a reward system for trolls and int feeders because the people who complain about them get insta-banned while the troll/int feeder gets away with NOTHING done in response. The current excuse for why this ok is "bots are hard to build", which i find insufficient. The defense against this is "well between no system and this system I choose this system". Surely I dont have to explain the false dichotomy of that. Currently I'd the talk to move into "how do we improve the effectiveness of the chat system without deterring it's power" with the herald. Meanwhile your still stuck on "verbal abuse is bad". Explain to me what the fuck your doing here.
Jo0o (NA)
: Except here's the wrinkle: I'm not arguing. I'm explaining. You're the one arguing. The system is pretty straightforward. You flame, you get punished. There's no consideration for mitigating circumstances, nor should there be. Flames = punish. I sympathize with being trolled, I truly do. I have no idea if you actually WERE being trolled, or just got pissed off when your teammates didn't behave the way you wanted them to, but either way that doesn't change the correct action for you to take. You were supposed to mute, report, and move on. Instead, here we are. Forum regulars responding to your threads have offered several arguments that you've disregarded as to *why* chat abuse is taken so seriously by Riot, and based on those examples, the system will not be shifting any time soon to allow leniency for individuals like you to flame your team. I suggest you instead look to make changes to your own behavior, in order to avoid a permanent ban down the line.
nazism is pretty straight forward. that doesnt make it right. Wait are you the guy who doesn't understand metaphors? Surely you get analogies right? Re read the opening post, reread your post. Tell me how "sit down shut up and stop complaining and fix YOURSELF" is a proper response to that post.
: >"you are the problem and ONLY YOU are the problem" Where did I imply this? When did I ever claim that intentional feeders were not a problem? >so take your "I'm the better behaved league player" Or this? I have yet to imply that I was better than you in anyway. >"verbale abuse" When did I misspell "verbal abuse"? I can only see these as a deliberate misquotes designed to be a strawman.
"you are the problem and ONLY YOU are the problem" You did not word for word say that nor is it a word for word quote for what you said. but it IS a good summary of all of your arguments since they all are engineer to be some form of "the rules are what they are and they are perfect in every way so YOU have to be the problem." you have yet to imply what now? "Or this? I have yet to imply that I was better than you in anyway." "You're responsible for your own actions. You're not absolved of responsibility because you acted poorly as a form of vigilante justice." "Ultimately, you're responsible for your own chat. If Renekton was truly trolling, you still fed the troll and cemented the impact he had on your game, while also rewarding him for his behavior." "Have you considered the possibility that you simply got banned for your actions without some grand conspiracy at play?" sure..... verbale abuse "oh noes he mistyped something. lets take it as an insult because thats totaly not an insular and closed minded way of aproaching things."-you
Chermorg (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=i404notfound,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=zkHZmNKe,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-14T12:55:50.647+0000) > > It's a known fact Promo matches are often rigged against you as a way of "proving" you deserve a promotion, but how rigged they are made to be are details Riot refuses to releases for reasons they also refuse to disclose. This "known fact" is actually unknown to 90+% of players. Would you care to provide any proof you have for this statement? >Why is it Riot would rather have players self destructively blame themselves for EVERYTHING wrong with the game instead of posting chat logs that INCLUDE other players actions? Because you control your enter key, not anyone else. Nobody else can stop you from nor make you start flaming. >You are insisting that a guy who outright admitted to trolling should get away scott free because I dared to try to win and complained about others not doing the same. Nobody is saying this at all. People are explaining that even if someone else acted badly, that does not justify your poor behavior. The other person does not get off free - but even if they aren't punished yet it doesn't make your behavior okay.
and the cherry picking begins. As for the promo's I'll have to dig up the giant post on the ranked system where they explain the promo system and how it "challenges" you. I mean I could quote the thousands of posts about rigged promo matches and filter out the ones that are just complaints to only include the ones with match breakdowns and reveals of what rank was on what side ONLY for you to dismiss it as "oh that's just a few cases". this ofc followed by the "you are the problem and YOU are the ONLY problem argument" but it's a Riot adviser so I really should expect such insular logic. as for the last point I never said my behavior was ok or justified. Jesus fuck did you even READ ANY of these posts? the ENTIRE point of this thread is to determine whether or not it's ok that the current chat system REWARDS trolls by PUNISHING their complainers due IN PART to the high overbearing effectiveness of a WORD SEARCH BOT and in part due to the total LACK of "int feed/troll" catching bot. This results in masses of troll going COMPLETELY undetected if not outright ignored while a vast majority of those ONLY complaining about said trolls and int feeders are getting perma-banned by the masses. I expect this sort of glossary generalization from unpaid forum mods but YOU should at least have SOME form professionalism and integrity to look at something fully before posting, particularly if your intent is beyond "silencing the complainer".
Jo0o (NA)
: What the fuck does any of this have to do with the topic at hand? I'm not gonna arbitrarily assign gold value to shit and play your pointless game. My point is that verbal abuse can destroy team cohesion and, in some cases, provoke trolling. I don't know how to calculate the negative gold value of a top laner abandoning his lane to AFK farm jungle/mid, but it's pretty fucking bad for a team. And it IS both of their faults. How is that a cop-out? My game got destroyed because two people would rather argue with each other than focus on winning the game, and I can't mute my way out of a situation like that. I reported both of them.
It's an arbitrary game, it's a irrefutable way to prove words have more impact than gameplay actions. If all your doing is regurgitating known facts like "people who are upset dont play as good" then the fuck are you posting in this thread for? On the other point, it IS a copout because you start by saying "It's all mid's fault cause he flamed and if he didnt EVERYTHING WOULD HAVE BEEN FINE" only to then switch sides and "nowait top fed and abandoned the game so it's kinda both their faults". do I need to hold your hand while you cross the street too?
: based off what ive seen so far, it seems that the people on your team were inting and trolling and it made you angry. I understand why you got mad as you and/or a few other teammates got mad that hypothetically bot lane was inting or trolling for fun. I think its ok to get get mad and tbh i expect the trolls to be ready for that behavior. But, in the hypothetical case where bot lane was having a bad game and feeding UNINTENTIONALLY, it is NOT okay to flame them (especially in normals your not losing anything really). That deserves punishment if your get so angry you demoralize the team when they are only humans prone to error. Idk if the second case concerns your initial statement as I would need more specifics. But in the case it doesn't pertain to that situation, i think getting made is a natural reaction and you shouldn't get banned for flaming trolls.
holy shit someone who read the post. now i just need someone who makes a post LIKE yours but disagree's. thanks for the comment though.
Jo0o (NA)
: This guy clearly wants to argue against much easier opponents.
oh noes verbal abuse. how could you. It's almost a double standard you dont think you should get permabanned for that.
Jo0o (NA)
: You're putting a *lot* of words in my mouth. Don't flame people, and don't feed trolls. It's really that simple.
and I really cant respond to this because YOU keep starting new threads since you lost on the old ones. Stick to one thread or at least include context.
: So if I am to understand you, because being verbally harrassing or abrasive to your allies doesn't cause a distinct, immediately noticeable change in gold or gameplay, you are content to allow verbally harassing or being abrasive behavior towards people? That's not how the world works, and you know it. Just because you can't quantify in game terms how people being dicks in chat is affecting the game doesn't mean that affect doesn't exist or affect the game. People being dicks in the chat logs makes other people angry or causes them to mentally throw in the towel, both conditions of which will cause them to not play as good as they could with a focused concentration. If people aren't focused because they're too busy being angry or exhausted with dicks in the chat logs, that will cost you the game. It may not be immediately quantifiable, but breaking a player's focus and immersion in the game will cause the game to go badly, no matter how much you believe otherwise.
Because I can quantify how hard intentional feeding and trolling affects players I fail to see why a system that punishes complainers is rigged in such a way to reward trolls and inters with permabanning their victims. It's really cute but starting to get boring that you INSIST words are more impactful, and therefore more important, than direct action within the game, but until you PROVE that words SHOULD be punished harder than action you really have no argument here.
: I see a lot of quotes of things I didn't say.
"the current chat ban system rewards troll by banning people for complaining while the trolls get away with NOTHING done about them" "You're responsible for your own actions. You're not absolved of responsibility because you acted poorly as a form of vigilante justice." yes thats totaly not a easy representation of what your saying. If it isnt, clarify. If it is, I fail to see how this applies properly to my argument.
Jo0o (NA)
: Rumble was losing, but bot was winning. The game was probably still in the 50/50 range, before rumble got provoked by mid and started inting. As Ralleren stated for me, both mid and top were in the wrong. But mid picked a fight through chat with top, causing top to troll. If mid had shut up and focused on their own game, bot lane probably could have carried a losing Rumble.
Theres fare more to a game than "bot was winning" I get we're in a weird jungle meta where jungle has the most influence but adc still decides whether you win or lose but you cant call it 50/50 on ONLY two lanes. I fucking doubt bot would carry against a fed nasus. How were your junglers doing, what did you have as your botlane. Between player skill Jungler play Botlane play and words, WHICH of these has the MOST influence in the game and which of these has the least? If your gonna put words above ANY of them, then put a gold value on verbal abuse. You can cry it's all mid's fault all you want, but if you cant do it without copping with "well it's both of their faults" then your own argument on the subject has no value.
: Verbal abuse is not over-enforced compared to intentional feeding and trolling. Intentional feeding and trolling bans immediately send the person to a 14-day ban, whereas verbal abuse (as long as it wasn't extremely poor behavior) still has to go through two previous punishments before reaching the 14-day ban phase. You can't keep pointing to other form of toxicity and claim that Riot is rewarding people by being unable to detect them as effectively. Otherwise, Intentional feeders could just say, "Riot, you're REWARDING cheaters and scripters by auto-banning those who troll in response to them". No. You're responsible for your own actions. You're not absolved of responsibility because you acted poorly as a form of vigilante justice.
because words cost the team gold directly and are more influential than actual in game choices. Give me a gold value lost, not arbitrary "but you caused him to..." bullshit. An actual Gold per word value. While we're at it do explain how a permaban from just words on ONE game and a permaban from THOUSANDS of intentionally fed/trolled games is equal enforcement. Cry all you want about how the system are, doesnt excuse the unfairness. How quickly do "verbale abuse" cases get caught and solved. trick question the bot does both at the same time. How quickly do int feed and troll cases get solved "well first we have..." and theres your answer. It's cute that you want to make this "you are the problem and ONLY YOU are the problem" as every other white knight on here typically does but I'm not making a context specific argument. so take your "I'm the better behaved league player" speaches else where because they do nothing to forward or detract from the current argument.
: >How is not a glaring issue that players can intentional feed and incite others WITHOUT getting ANY punishment even when they admit to it but I get punished for using words. It's an issue that intentional feeding isn't punished super quickly, yes. But it's something Riot has stated they're working on, and it's a tricky problem to build an accurate system that doesn't catch innocent players with false positives. Believe me, we all experience it, and it's really frustrating. It is not, however, a valid reason to grant exceptions to the rule that you can't abuse other players. Riot doesn't want a community where it's SOMETIMES okay to abuse or belittle someone and SOMETIMES isn't.
But they DO want a community that DOESNT complain about anything less they get ban hammer dropped on them BEFORE the actual problems? Building bots is hard, sure. That doesn't justify how the current system rewards trolls by BANNING people who complain about them. This is the equivalent of you calling the police because the house next to you is being robbed, but when the police arrive they do NOTHING to the thieves because "building the bots is hard" while they put you away for life because "you complained". When three weeks later law enforcement is CONSIDERING to MAYBE investigate the burglery and you ask why you were put in prison for complaining while the thieves still roam free the response you get is "the system is perfectly fine as is and theres NO improvement to made on the current set up exept the bot we're building".
: Literally the title of your post: >...why is considered a crime to get mad at the game? I have not derailed from anything, as I'm addressing the heart of your inability to understand what is acceptable behavior. **Riot doesn't reward trolls.** And you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary. There are no achievements for trolling and there is, quite obviously, a report feature to indicate when someone does it in game. Even if someone trolls/ints/doesn't play how you want them to play, and you get really mad, it still doesn't give you a right to be an asshole. Keep your insults to yourself and use the report button after the game. End of story.
GOOGLE the definition of a metaphor. actualy fuck it, I'll do it for you. METAPHOR: a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable. key phrase, NOT LITERALLY APPLICABLE. MEANING I AM NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY IMPLYING I WILL IN ANY WAY HAVE ANY LEGAL OR AUTHORITATIVE ACTION TAKEN AGAINST ME. now that I ended that argument, yes they are rewarding trolls. a trolls goal is to inflict as much missery upon others as possible no? A troll however cannot perma-ban someone, yet Riot will perma-ban someone for complaining about trolls LONG before they even THINK about investigating the troll provided the doesn't say anything. Riot is literally executing the final blow that trolls want to take. I mean what is more misery inducing in this game than losing your account. You even get messages telling you when the ban hammer strikes now. It's cute and dandy it wasnt INTENDED for that purpose, but can you deny that is NOT how it works in the end?
: > [{quoted}](name=i404notfound,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=000400000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-14T14:21:59.451+0000)All you literally had to answer was "the current system of banning complainers NOT working as well as intended but better than no system"OR "the current system of rewarding trolls is acceptable to no system" The chat detection portion of the system is working as intended though. It is banning those who are verbally abusive to their teammates. The fact that people often choose to be verbally abuses due to provocation by trolls and/or intentional feeders is problematic, yes, but it still a conscious choice to engage in that abusive chat behavior by those players. My personal stance is "the IFS could benefit from improvement in several respects, but reducing its existing effectiveness in one aspect just because another is underdeveloped is a step backwards." >As such, how is this an acceptable system given that troll/int detection isn't working? Because that system is working, just somewhat inefficiently. One fully working system and one working but inefficient system is better than two inefficient systems. > How is a system that, though not intended for it, was unintentionally designed to reward trolls by doing far more damage to the victim than the perpetrator while the system being built to catch trolls/inting was KNOWN to be so far behind that a majority of cases would get by with little if ANY action taken against them considering "perfectly acceptable and not worth changing at all because it is right?: Because the only two solutions seem to be this: 1. Strengthen the troll/feeder detection. This is what Riot is working on. 2. Weaken the chat abuse punishments to allow venting that abuses teammates, which increases toxicity and leads to more chat abuse slipping through the cracks in other ways. Riot does not want the solution that takes a step backwards by enabling more chat toxicity, nor did they want to delay the solution to part of the toxicity problem simply because another wasn't as swift as they'd like.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=0004000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-14T14:33:35.600+0000) > > The chat detection portion of the system is working as intended though. It is banning those who are verbally abusive to their teammates. The fact that people often choose to be verbally abuses due to provocation by trolls and/or intentional feeders is problematic, yes, but it still a conscious choice to engage in that abusive chat behavior by those players. And does nothing to justify why the system is allowed to REWARD problematic behavior by banning complaints of said behavior. If you give up because of it or int too that has no application to my argument. ONLY complaints. > > My personal stance is "the IFS could benefit from improvement in several respects, but reducing its existing effectiveness in one aspect just because another is underdeveloped is a step backwards." How is tuning off the "insta-perma bans" and going towards more feedback a step back? Why is it considered that because no further communication between the report system and the player has been investigated that no possible improvement in this area can be made? Literaly the only argument I've heard is it might, key word MIGHT, lead to players skirting the boarder of the system, to which i have to ask what a fucking tragedy people are behaving right? > > Because that system is working, just somewhat inefficiently. One fully working system and one working but inefficient system is better than two inefficient systems. inefficient and ineffective are NOT interchangeable terms. An engine that can pull 2000LB is an effective engine, but an engine that can only pull 100LB but pull that weight for 4000miles on one gallon of gas is an efficient engine. A system that doesn't work correctly isn't inefficient, it is ineffective. Currently, due in large part to the complaints you can largely see ignored by reds, it is ineffective. When people start complaining that bans aren't happening fast enough instead of complaining that bans aren't happening AT ALL, then you can use efficient. > > Because the only two solutions seem to be this: > > 1. Strengthen the troll/feeder detection. This is what Riot is working on. > 2. Weaken the chat abuse punishments, which simply leads to more chat abuse. > > Riot does not want the solution that takes a step backwards by enabling more chat toxicity, nor did they want to delay the solution to part of the toxicity problem simply because another wasn't as swift as they'd like. False binary. Many other options in between that. Recently a player AGAIN suggested that you get to see when people are reporting you for verbal abuse. You don't need names tagged to it, all you need it "you have currently x report of auto-confirmed verbal abuse about you" with chat logs. Again, I can already hear the "oh noes but people MIGHT use it to skirt the system" but if you aren't getting mallet-ed over the head with no warning how is it a tragedy that people have the tools they need to learn behavior? I mean don't you see that getting banned for complaints alone being a recurring issue shows fundamental flaw in player behavior?
RallerenP (EUW)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=000000000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-14T14:27:15.824+0000) > > Not at all. One is directly meant as an insult, one isn't. You can't call anyone professional victims because the reciever of an insult is quite literally a victim. It is insular because you cant comprehend the idea of something being both insulting and sudgestive. You know what the difference between "go left" and "go left idiot" is? Yes it is the insult, but the insult does NOT invalidate ALL OTHER INFORMATION. This is what I mean by calling you fragile. you see ONE WORD and lock out all other information because there cant possibly be ANYTHING useful coming from someone who isnt calling you perfect right? > > This only works if we are talking about inting. If they accidentally dropped the newspaper trying to give you one, then asking why you didn't recieve it is really rude. We are only talking about inting and trolling. For fuck sake read the context. I'm not talking about suspect anything because then you have to have a way to verify which we currently dont. So for the sake of MY argument I am asuming the inter is infact inting. You can cry about how unrealistic that is, but it doesn't affect my argument. > > Telling him to improve himself to not drop newspapers in the future and berating him because he dropped it is the definition of harrassment. I'm really starting to think you didnt even complete reading the opening post since your getting all high and mighty about harassment instead of the current point. > > Because you are talking about complaints that are insults. You will NEVER get punished for telling someone to play safer or to not chase a kill in the future. (Just examples. The points is that you will not get punished for critizing someone constructively.) > > You're selfish because just complaining only serves to make YOU feel better while demoralizing everone else. > > Then maybe you should have mentioned that somewhere along the line. This is the first time you've even mentioned that we are only talking about inters. Give me any "critism" and by your own words I can undeniably twist it into an insult, simply because if I can find ANY implication of me not being good at ANYTHING you claim it is is ALWAYS harassment. No really. Give the safest critism you think is possible I can prove it to you.
: 1. you can be as unhappy as you want about a game. that doesn't give you the right to throw a tantrum in game like a child or throw insults at other players just bc you're unhappy. your displeasure about losing a *game* is not license to ruin it for others or to personally attack them. if you can't be civil in chat, don't fucking use it. not that hard. 2. censoring words and permabanning people for using them is completely acceptable because riot is not the government. they are a company providing a service and have every right to **a)**dictate the rules for using the service and **b)**refuse service to anyone who breaks their rules. you aren't being forced to use their service, and your legal rights aren't being threatened. you still have every right to say what you want without getting arrested bc it's not a *crime*, but people don't have to listen or tolerate it. 3. i think you can't *contextualize* with relevancy is bc your point is not valid.
1. that's a cute line of thought but greatly derails from the point of "why should Riot reward trolls for trolling". I'm not arguing for free speech, I am arguing for fair enforcement. Get your sh!t straight. 2. oh yeah deflect to legalities cause that'll totally get a proper answer instead of devolving into interpretations of law. Refer to point 1. 3. I KNOW for a fact that YOUR point is POINTLESS because anyone with any experience in English can understand a metaphor. Calling it a crime CLEARLY doesn't mean I'm going to jail for it, but DOES mean Riot considers it a high offense against their rule set. Please clarify if you lack either the schooling or the maturity to understand this.
RallerenP (EUW)
: > How did they have a HUGE impact? they are words. If you think words have no impact you are ignorant and there is no point in discussion. The impact is huge BECAUSE THEY TRIGGERED THE ACTIONS THAT LOST THE GAME. Without the words, they might not have lost the game. It was because of the words the rumble decided to int! BOTH Rumble and the midlaner deserve punishment. They both contributed greatly to intentionally losing the game. > The impact they have is FELT to be huge because the current player behavior system punishes words FAR HARSHER than any action you could take. Words are punished LESS harshly, but it's easier to prove that words are intentionally meant to harm than to prove an action is. You don't understand the system, so look it up next time. > Explain to me, using ONLY gold value to objectify this, how words are far worse than ANY action you can take. Ok: Words MADE the Rumble int, meaning the enemy gain gold from him. I NEVER claimed Rumble was innocent, but the discussion is that the midlaner was guilty aswell. > I'd really like to know how much gold I'm dragging away from my team by using a text box. You are the jungler in this scenario. So let's say top lane misplays **accidentally**. You write "GG report top inting". This tilts the toplaner even more making him play worse, feeding the enemy further. You indirectly caused the enemy to gain gold. --- Had you instead said nothing, or encouraged him like "Almost out..." or "I'll gank top soon" or even "play safer :)" Then he wouldn't have tilted and he would play better. He might even comeback and get a kill, in which case you indirectly gained gold for your team. Both cases you ONLY used chat.
> [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-14T14:09:17.500+0000) > > If you think words have no impact you are ignorant and there is no point in discussion. > > The impact is huge BECAUSE THEY TRIGGERED THE ACTIONS THAT LOST THE GAME. Without the words, they might not have lost the game. It was because of the words the rumble decided to int! > > BOTH Rumble and the midlaner deserve punishment. They both contributed greatly to intentionally losing the game. > > Words are punished LESS harshly, but it's easier to prove that words are intentionally meant to harm than to prove an action is. You don't understand the system, so look it up next time. > > Ok: Words MADE the Rumble int, meaning the enemy gain gold from him. I can break this argument with an age old saying "so if I tell you to jump off a bridge you'll do it right?" I get it, words within context have different power over different people. Have you stopped to consider that perhaps the ONLY reason words in THIS case seems to have so much power is because YOU are focused on WORDS instead of gameplay? > > I NEVER claimed Rumble was innocent, but the discussion is that the midlaner was guilty aswell. > > You are the jungler in this scenario. > > So let's say top lane misplays **accidentally**. > > You write "GG report top inting". > > This tilts the toplaner even more making him play worse, feeding the enemy further. > > You indirectly caused the enemy to gain gold. You cant use indrect arguments to counter DIRECT arguments. > > --- > > Had you instead said nothing, or encouraged him like > > "Almost out..." or "I'll gank top soon" or even "play safer :)" > > Then he wouldn't have tilted and he would play better. He might even comeback and get a kill, in which case you indirectly gained gold for your team. > > Both cases you ONLY used chat. yes I could tell every troll and int feeder "gj on troll/int feed" because that'll make them stop....ohwait... Again your looking through shaded lenses to see ONLY your own points. You keep ignoring gameplay to address only SUBJECTIVE things such as "how does this person feel" and "are these words nice". you keep trying to imply that by using "proper language" I can somehow unfeed toplane and un trollify the troll. It's cute that you want everyone happy, but you wont win this by dodging around the questions you dont want to answer. Your arguing a point that has no place in context with my argument.
: > [{quoted}](name=i404notfound,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=0004000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-14T13:53:34.508+0000)You encouraging perma-banns for people who are ONLY disrespectful in chat while giving a free pass to those who genuinely hurt gameplay through gameplay under the excuse of "building bots is hard." I'm not giving it a free pass -- I'm saying that it's silly to say that we'll give one form of abuse we CAN readily detect a free pass while we improve our methods of detecting another. >Can you deny that you find it acceptable that verbal abuse is punished far more often and far harsher than intentional feeder/trolling? Yes, I can deny that, actually. I just think the solution isn't to lessen punishments for verbal abuse, but rather to work on strengthening accurate detection of non-verbal abuse. > So do please state your opinion on whether or not it's "ok" that verbal abuse is enforced to a far harsher degree than intentional feeding or trolling as there really is no argument to be had without it. It is not okay, but it is worse to give leeway to verbal abuse cases (which makes people think that is acceptable) in the interest of "fairness" only to roll that back when troll detection improves. >I just fail to see why it was designed SPECIFICALLY to reward intentional feeder and trolls. As above, it is not. It is designed to detect one type of behavior, as other IFS modules are designed to detect others. The fact that people feel it advantages feeders and trolls is an unfortunate side effect of that bot being less quick at detection currently, but that is a side effect of that process being more complex, NOT an intentional design to favor those behaviors. Again, the solution is not to reduce the effectiveness of existing bots and, in doing so, enable more abusive behavior.
Again, dodging the point. All you literally had to answer was "the current system of banning complainers NOT working as well as intended but better than no system" OR "the current system of rewarding trolls is acceptable to no system" Instead you literally reworded your last post resulting you going several miles an hour to the EXACT same spot you started. keeping in mind how cute it is that it was INTENDED to cut down on ONE behavior type, it is undeniable that by punishing the complainers BEFORE the actual trolls you are rewarding them by accomplishing their end further than they alone are capable of. As such, how is this an acceptable system given that troll/int detection isn't working? or in otherwords, How is a system that, though not intended for it, was unintentionally designed to reward trolls by doing far more damage to the victim than the perpetrator while the system being built to catch trolls/inting was KNOWN to be so far behind that a majority of cases would get by with little if ANY action taken against them considering "perfectly acceptable and not worth changing at all because it is right"?
: If the chat box was as insignificant as you claim, why are you clearly SEVERELY triggered by things you read there, to the point where you feel you have to retaliate? If you believe that you and someone else spewing insults at each other doesn't immediately make the game uncomfortable and intolerable for the rest of your team, you are badly mistaken. No one wants to be in a game where their team is infighting and stopping to type insults at each other every two minutes. That DOES affect your chances of winning, as does causing your team to simply give up because they don't want to deal with the chat log bullshit anymore.
because I'm not triggered by it. My complaints are made during downtime when I dont have to engage with the game. I dont ruin everyone's chances of winning by REFUSING to play UNLIKE the trolls and intentional feeder I'm complaining about. Yet you still insist I am the greater evil because? Again, give me a solid gold value relative to each word typed as gold lost and I can understand this. Until then, your still trying to cure malaria by fixing the fever alone. Complaints are a sign there is a problem, complaints are NOT the problem until you decide to be so insular you can only blame the loudest voice. How is this concept so hard to grasp? This problem was solved in a simple shooter, I dont remember which battlefeild it was, with the simple invention of PTFO. Play The Fukking Objective. You werent banned for complaining, you werent banned for using words, you were banned if you were causing a measurable disadvantage to your team. Somehow you along with most of the community are trying to run player behavior with the POLAR OPPOSITE idea in mind, with mannerism and cencorship taking precedence over actual gameplay.
RallerenP (EUW)
: > Why is it that "why hasnt top gotten ganks" get taken as an instult instead of "I should gank top"? I assume you meant "Can I get a gank top?" and not "I should gank top?" The answer is that one is an accusation of the other player being bad, while the other is a simple question with no malicious intent. One is taken as an insult because it is HEAVILY implied that it is. > Complaints only serve to demoralize those who are too selfish to think of others and consider WHAT they are complaining about. Explain how. I say complaints demoralizis EVERYONE. Those who complain are the selfish ones who can't see their own mistakes. > You would rather ban me because you dont like my COMPLAINTS rather than find WHY I am complaining. Yes. You're complaining is entirely unnessecary, harmful and **intentional**, whilst what you are complaining about isn't necessarily intentionally harmful.
> [{quoted}](name=RallerenP,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=0000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-14T13:49:07.528+0000) > > I assume you meant "Can I get a gank top?" and not "I should gank top?" > > The answer is that one is an accusation of the other player being bad, while the other is a simple question with no malicious intent. One is taken as an insult because it is HEAVILY implied that it is. Isnt it highly fragile of you to say that ANYTHING that can be accusation of a player being is ONLY an accusation of a player being bad? While not extreme, this is within a similar veign to feminist being "triggered" by literally every opposition. Do you not see how this fosters professional victimhood instead of actual thinking? If I ask for a news paper and dont recieve one despite them appearing to be readily available is it logical to ask for a paper again or to ask why you didn't receive one? Similarly, despite the accusation and regardless of it's implication, why is it acceptable to ban someone for that choice of words instead of trying to improve yourself. > > Explain how. > > I say complaints demoralizis EVERYONE. Those who complain are the selfish ones who can't see their own mistakes. Criticism isn't nice. It's not suppose to be. but if you choose to take it as pure insult and NOT AT ALL question yourself for it how does that make me, the complainer, selfish? It's positively insular that ANYTHING that isn't sunshine and rainbows is unacceptable behavior from you. This without even touching on the generalization that EVERYONE is ALWAYS demoralized by complaints as according to you everyone is incapable of processing them. > > Yes. You're complaining is entirely unnessecary, harmful and **intentional**, whilst what you are complaining about isn't necessarily intentionally harmful. oh, intentional feeding and trolling isn't intentional harmful. Your so full of sh!t. Reread that sentence and remember that we aren't agueing a specific player in a specific spot but assuming the troll in question IS trolling the complainer is ONLY complaining.
: > [{quoted}](name=i404notfound,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hYnOQztg,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2018-03-14T13:37:53.227+0000)Why is it perfectly justifiable from your perspective to intentionally feed and troll... I never said that. It should be (and is) punishable to do those things, and I personally would like to see Riot find a more reliable way to detect these behaviors. They do punish them *more* aggressively than all but the very worst chat behavior (which earns an equal level of punishment -- an immediate 14-day ban), but they are currently harder to detect accurately. The fact that I think it should be punishable to verbally abuse other community does not mean I think it's okay to intentionally ruin games via gameplay either. It's more accurate to say that I feel it's punishable to disrespect your team, whether it be through your gameplay or your chat. --------------------------- In short, Riot DOES do something about the troll and intentional feeders. The system that detects them is just a bit more cautious to avoid catching players having a bad day. It's something they're working on improving, albeit more slowly than many of us would like, but it's not true that they're ignoring it or endorsing that behavior.
And yet you entirely condone poeple being banned for complaining about trolls and feeders. You encouraging perma-banns for people who are ONLY disrespectful in chat while giving a free pass to those who genuinely hurt gameplay through gameplay under the excuse of "building bots is hard". You dont have to word for word say something in order to state an opinion. can you deny that you find it acceptable that verbal abuse is punished far more often and far harsher than intentional feeder/trolling? It really doesn't matter that you hide behind the copy pasta excuse Riot regurgitates when this issue is brought up. To put it similarly as someone else argues in another thread, If I break the rules then I have broken the rules and that's the end of it. So do please state your opinion on whether or not it's "ok" that verbal abuse is enforced to a far harsher degree than intentional feeding or trolling as there really is no argument to be had without it. Do also keep in mind I am no way or form saying verbal abuse is a non-issue/dimissing it's existence. I understand why the system is in place, I just fail to see why it was designed SPECIFICALLY to reward intentional feeder and trolls. if you really need reference on this last sentence refer to the opening post.
AraMoOse (NA)
: Ok so, 1. it is not a CRIME. It doesn't need to be a crime for it to be unacceptable. 2. Riot isn't forcing you to be happy. They are asking you not to verbally assault people. This is a very reasonable request. 3. Riot is not sending you to jail. Either you can make your point without lying and exagerating - In which case you should do so - OR, you cannot make your point without lying or exagerating - In which case your point is not valid.
cries about lying an exaggeration in a post filled with lying and exaggeration. I would make the kettle and pot reference but that would require admitting to something I haven't done. Asuming you actualy want to have a discussion: 1. It apparently is a crime Since Riot will perma-ban you for EXPRESSING what your angry about WITHOUT actualy doing anything to what made you angry. 2. Censoring words and permabanning people for using them is hardly reasonable, but sure they arent stapling a smile to my face I'll give you that. 3. I fail to see any way I can contextualize this into a relevant point.
RallerenP (EUW)
: Not Jo0o but I feel qualified to answer: > D. How is this an example of how player action DIDNT lose you the game but WORDS and WORDS ALONE did? It's a combination of both. In Jo0o's case words triggered a player to do actions that intentionally lost the game. BOTH parties are wrong. Had the midlaner been positive the rumble may just have played safer and not inted. Instead the midlaner chose to flame him and lost the game because of it. Words alone didn't cause Jo0o to lose, but they had a HUGE impact on it.
How did they have a HUGE impact? they are words. The impact they have is FELT to be huge because the current player behavior system punishes words FAR HARSHER than any action you could take. Explain to me, using ONLY gold value to objectify this, how words are far worse than ANY action you can take. I'd really like to know how much gold I'm dragging away from my team by using a text box.
RallerenP (EUW)
: I don't think this car metaphor properly works. Complaining only serves in making chances of a win less. You are only demoralizing everyone. IT DOES NOTHING ELSE.
Why is it that "why hasnt top gotten ganks" get taken as an instult instead of "I should gank top"? Complaints only serve to demoralize those who are too selfish to think of others and consider WHAT they are complaining about. This is infact the exact behavior I based this post on. You would rather ban me because you dont like my COMPLAINTS rather than find WHY I am complaining.
Exibir mais

i404notfound

Nível 47 (NA)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão