Only what you're reported for should be voted in the Tribunal.

12
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DeathKiraZ

Member

12-28-2012

In a case like this http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/....php?t=2914962

Everyone in the thread states that his response of "gay" was the reason he was punished. Though he wasn't insulting anyone, and it was just an accidental response, the trigger happy banners and toxic people like sereg and Shiister just hammerban for little offenses regardless of the situation. Alright, but see, this guy was reported by only the enemy and not his team. They had no way knowing what he said in all chat. It was a false report. Why should the enemy get lucky and spam report and a tribunal report that shouldn't be there gets the man banned. I'm pretty sure you can ask any red why more than one report gets you in the tribunal is because people do make mistakes. One slip up and never again doesn't lead you to the tribunal, but someone spamming reports for no reason, over and over and these instances of one cases of of 6 are shown, everyone assumes you're toxic. Everyone takes a guilty until innocent approach to the tribunal. That they are there for a reason, they must be toxic, though that one case never would have been shown, had they not be flooded with false reports from random people. If you're only reported for what you do, you'll be reported more often and you'll be judged accordingly. So Basically you should only be allowed to judge for what they were reported for. What are the categories for then? If they had no purpose, wouldn't there only a button at the end that says toxic player? No, instead there are specific things. I don't see why an enemy should be able to report someone for one reason, and then joking around with a team, who do not mind the language because they do not report, should be reported. And then sent to the tribunal to be made ridicule of people like Shiister and sereg.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

OhBoyItsaMegaman

Senior Member

12-28-2012

I feel extremely confident that if we were instructed to punish people only for the reason that was selected in the dropdown, the game would suffer as a result. More toxic players would remain in the game for longer periods of time, resulting in more games ruined overall. There would be no benefit whatsoever.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Enterti

Senior Member

12-28-2012

From the Guidelines Riot gave us

"10. Focus on the reported player and Understand the system

Sometimes a player who is reported isn't the worst offender in the case/chatlog. Remember who is being accused before passing judgment on the case. If the reported player is bad, but not the worst, they should still be punished. If they don't deserve punishment but there was another offender in the case, don't punish the accused player. If the player doesn't deserve punishment for the reported reason ( i.e. "excessive time spent idle"), but they still had an offensive name or used abusive language, they might still be subject to punishment. Remember that "punish" constitutes your verdict that the reported player’s actions were outside the scope of positive, competitive gameplay – it does not represent your request to have Riot Games evaluate that report, or every player in it, as a whole. Based on your determination, Riot Games will only be taking action, if any, against the particular reported player."


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

kaleb bartlett

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

12-28-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by OhBoyItsaMegaman View Post
I feel extremely confident that if we were instructed to punish people only for the reason that was selected in the dropdown, the game would suffer as a result. More toxic players would remain in the game for longer periods of time, resulting in more games ruined overall. There would be no benefit whatsoever.
yep, pretty much this.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Great Pyrenees

Senior Member

12-28-2012

Unfortunatly there are more ways to be toxic than there are options in the dropdown. In addition we are supposed to look for any and all infractions while we review the case. Seriously if someone is reported for intentionally feeding and hes dropping the N word every other sentence you think they should be pardoned?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Koelio

Senior Member

12-28-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diakira View Post
In a case like this http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/....php?t=2914962

Everyone in the thread states that his response of "gay" was the reason he was punished. Though he wasn't insulting anyone, and it was just an accidental response, the trigger happy banners and toxic people like sereg and Shiister just hammerban for little offenses regardless of the situation. Alright, but see, this guy was reported by only the enemy and not his team. They had no way knowing what he said in all chat. It was a false report. Why should the enemy get lucky and spam report and a tribunal report that shouldn't be there gets the man banned. I'm pretty sure you can ask any red why more than one report gets you in the tribunal is because people do make mistakes. One slip up and never again doesn't lead you to the tribunal, but someone spamming reports for no reason, over and over and these instances of one cases of of 6 are shown, everyone assumes you're toxic. Everyone takes a guilty until innocent approach to the tribunal. That they are there for a reason, they must be toxic, though that one case never would have been shown, had they not be flooded with false reports from random people. If you're only reported for what you do, you'll be reported more often and you'll be judged accordingly. So Basically you should only be allowed to judge for what they were reported for. What are the categories for then? If they had no purpose, wouldn't there only a button at the end that says toxic player? No, instead there are specific things. I don't see why an enemy should be able to report someone for one reason, and then joking around with a team, who do not mind the language because they do not report, should be reported. And then sent to the tribunal to be made ridicule of people like Shiister and sereg.
Well, you've pretty much followed straight in the footsteps of others here. One baseless assumption after another. Really destroys your credibility.

Ever think that he said some inappropriate things in pre- or post-game lobby and trays where the reports stem from? Lots and lots of people don't know that the Tribunal doesn't get those chatlogs and if something needs to be reported in there a support ticket must be filled out. I was one of those people until I started doing Tribunal and reading the forums here. It happens.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

gnfnrf

Senior Member

12-28-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diakira View Post
In a case like this http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/....php?t=2914962

Everyone in the thread states that his response of "gay" was the reason he was punished. Though he wasn't insulting anyone, and it was just an accidental response, the trigger happy banners and toxic people like sereg and Shiister just hammerban for little offenses regardless of the situation. Alright, but see, this guy was reported by only the enemy and not his team. They had no way knowing what he said in all chat. It was a false report. Why should the enemy get lucky and spam report and a tribunal report that shouldn't be there gets the man banned. I'm pretty sure you can ask any red why more than one report gets you in the tribunal is because people do make mistakes. One slip up and never again doesn't lead you to the tribunal, but someone spamming reports for no reason, over and over and these instances of one cases of of 6 are shown, everyone assumes you're toxic. Everyone takes a guilty until innocent approach to the tribunal. That they are there for a reason, they must be toxic, though that one case never would have been shown, had they not be flooded with false reports from random people. If you're only reported for what you do, you'll be reported more often and you'll be judged accordingly. So Basically you should only be allowed to judge for what they were reported for. What are the categories for then? If they had no purpose, wouldn't there only a button at the end that says toxic player? No, instead there are specific things. I don't see why an enemy should be able to report someone for one reason, and then joking around with a team, who do not mind the language because they do not report, should be reported. And then sent to the tribunal to be made ridicule of people like Shiister and sereg.
Are you reading the same thread I am? Two people speculated that "gay" might have caused other people to punish, but that they personally wouldn't have, and one person said that it would have as an obvious troll/joke. Nobody else proposed a rationale for punishment.

If this case shows a flaw in the Tribunal, it's that people punish for poor play, not that they punish for poor language.

And furthermore, it shows that the EUW Tribunal punishes for poor play. Several high profile examples have been floating around the forums of people apparently punished for poor play, but all of them are from EUW.

Now, as to your original point, ignoring the example:

The goal of the Tribunal is to improve the game experience for the majority of players.

It does so by removing players who degrade the game experience for others.

When presented with an opportunity to remove a player who is clearly and obviously degrading the game experience for others, the Tribunal should act.

It should even act if the report was for a different reason (maybe the person misclicked, or maybe they wanted to report for two reasons) or completely coincidental. The goal is not to validate reports, but to remove toxic players.

Why are they categories of report? A couple of reasons. First, not all categories lead to the Tribunal, or are processed by the Tribunal in the same way. Leave/AFK reports are used by LeaverBuster, and Unskilled Player reports are used by the matchmaking system, but neither contribute to Tribunal cases. Inappropriate name reports are judged differently, since the Tribunal needs to know the summoner name in question.

Second, the report type helps the Tribunal with a starting point for evaluating the reported player's behavior. It's a shorthand way to describe why you are reporting without typing an essay in the comment box. It's not the end of the Tribunal's research; it's the beginning.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Shelzin

Senior Member

12-28-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterti View Post
From the Guidelines Riot gave us

"10. Focus on the reported player and Understand the system

Sometimes a player who is reported isn't the worst offender in the case/chatlog. Remember who is being accused before passing judgment on the case. If the reported player is bad, but not the worst, they should still be punished. If they don't deserve punishment but there was another offender in the case, don't punish the accused player. If the player doesn't deserve punishment for the reported reason ( i.e. "excessive time spent idle"), but they still had an offensive name or used abusive language, they might still be subject to punishment. Remember that "punish" constitutes your verdict that the reported player’s actions were outside the scope of positive, competitive gameplay – it does not represent your request to have Riot Games evaluate that report, or every player in it, as a whole. Based on your determination, Riot Games will only be taking action, if any, against the particular reported player."
Say it again.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CoIlo

Member

12-28-2012

But then I wouldn't be able to false report people I don't like. No, sir, that just wouldn't do.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kinvaras666

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

12-28-2012

wrong.

Enterti above me have it right


12