||01-11-2013 09:59 AM
Originally Posted by Gimpyloser
I am not a scumbag so I of course don't just click punish, but I went through my last 100 cases, did the math, and had I done nothing but punish, I'd have 92% accuracy. Based on my review of the cases I pardon that are punished, it is clear that a large number of people are using the spam punish tactic for improved accuracy and rating. I'll keep taking the accuracy hits and keep doing the right thing, but this concerns me greatly. What is also concerning are the more recent comments by Wookie, regarding a few cases in which the cases presented to the tribunal did not warrant punishment. Wookie often researches the punished player and finds games which are not in the tribunal that would warrant a punishment in order to justify the failure of the tribunal system. The Tribunal is suppose to vote based on the evidence presented to them and finding games outside of the tribunal's level of access to justify why a player was incorrectly punished is not really a valid argument in my opinion. The problem here seems to be tribunal members spamming punish.
Why does this argument always seem to pop up? Yet again, let me explain why this reasoning is faulty. You are concluding that the Tribunal is full of a "large number of people are using the spam punish tactic for improved accuracy and rating." In concluding this, you have already disregarded a much more likely conclusion: that most people who enter the Tribunal merit punishment
. The Tribunal cases are not an assortment of random people in random situations. Rather, they are players who have been reported above the threshold needed to enter the system to begin with. It would be extremely faulty to assume that these players are simply a random collection and would show an average punishment level when the method used to get this sample is hardly random at all. As such, simply concluding that X% of players are punished, thus the system is broken is completely devoid of any analysis: it's simply your presumption.
You assume that your punishment level should be less than 92%, without any reason why. If I were to do the Tribunal and assume that my punishment level should be 100%, using your reasoning I would conclude that the Tribunal is full of people who spam pardon so as to not punish players. Of course this would be faulty logic, but it's the same that you are employing. You can't say that X% of players being punished shows anything more than X% of players were punished because there is no reference point to show anything else. And that's not even going into your incredibly low sample size, but that's another topic entirely.
And as to your point about WookieCookie using the tools available, Riot has consistently said that the Tribunal is merely one method of punishment. It is certainly not the only one used. Your proposals for what the Tribunal should be are clearly not what the Tribunal is: one of a handful of tools used by Riot to ensure that those players who negatively influence the game are dealt with.