Tribunal is great and all but why not make it much better?

123
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Auspexa

Member

01-04-2013

gotta bump again this gd speed gave me cancer :/


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Auspexa

Member

01-04-2013

bump


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Auspexa

Member

01-04-2013

bump


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Auspexa

Member

01-04-2013

bump


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Auspexa

Member

01-04-2013

bump


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Auspexa

Member

01-04-2013

is my thread invisible? lolz


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PenguinKillBear

Senior Member

01-04-2013

Hi! I would like to say thank you for making a thoughtful post. I dont agree with many of your ideas, but I dont want you to take it the wrong way. I just have a different opinion on the issues.

1) In regards to needing 5 games for a case to exist: I do not believe this is necessary. The major reason being that Riot has said once you make it to the tribunal it only takes one game of punishable behavior for you to vote "punish". If that one game is punishable you deserve to be punished. It actually helps borderline cases to have fewer cases shown as 1 case has a better chance of not being toxic than 5 games of not having one instance of punishable behavior.

2) The punishment meter I dont this is necessary. The fact is the tribunal makes no decision in terms of what type of punishment you receive. This is based on the amount of times you have been punished previously by the tribunal. If you have already been suspended 4 times already and continue to display bad behavior in game you should not be treated any different than other offenders. Bad behavior is bad behavior.

3) I do not disagree with an explanation being required for reports.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Hiryuu16

Senior Member

01-04-2013

"Sample pool of games that appear in Tribunal cases have to be expanded"
I don't think a wall of 30 cases will change the outcome much. At least, not toward fewer bans. More stats, such as total reports vs. total games played within some time window might be nice. Also, pre-game chat, post-game chat, in-game events (who killed whom, turret takedowns), and specifying ranked, normal, custom, or AI.

"There should be a 'punishment meter' that's selectable on cases."
Aside from a "rush to perma" option for extreme outliers, I'm not sold. If they keep displaying the same behavior despite being told over and over again to stop, one more "please stop" is not going to fix it. They don't have a God-given right to play LoL. They need to just go away and find another hobby.

"Report explanation should be obligatory with minimum letter limit"
I'm not opposed, but mostly indifferent on this one.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

gnfnrf

Senior Member

01-04-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Auspexa View Post
Most people think Tribunal is perfect because they probably think, "if you get reported for no reason, you won't get banned". This is partially wrong. The amount of games you get reported have a HUGE impact on your Tribunal case and Riot's approach to your account. Riot always says "you got reported on 500 games, therefore you ruined 4500 ppl's gaming experience". I call bullcrap. Most of the time it's an argument between 2 players, so it's usually 1 report and even that report isn't accurate in some cases. Riot is pretty much exaggerating this, as if it wasn't enough that players are using "report" as a weapon, Riot is also using this.
I have never seen a single non-trolling/sarcastic player say that the Tribunal is perfect.

Quote:
Think of a scenario where you get reported for illegitimate reasons most of the time and you can't control your anger on some games and outburst happens. If any of those games appear on your Tribunal case, you will get banned although rare anger outbursts shouldn't ban people as Riot stated earlier. But it doesn't work like that because Tribunal only takes the amount of games you get reported and put a sample into Tribunal. Now it's all up to your luck, it's all up to the games that appear on the sample. This causes inaccuracy in Tribunal, here is an example.

So that guy got reported on 300 games? Better put only 1 game of him into Tribunal. 1 game is totally enough to judge a player and decide the future of his account, doesn't even matter he has been playing for 3 years or he has spent hundreds of dollars on his account, must get permabanned instantly because he called someone "idiot". This is Tribunal's current state in a nutshell. It's working, it could also be said that it's accurate but not good enough. But there's a fix.
This bad luck would have to happen five times in a row to permaban him. And remember, Riot can tell what the background noise of nonsense reports is by looking at normal players. And they have done so, and determined that it somewhere between 1-2% of games. So they set the Tribunal threshold very much higher than that, around 10-15% of games. Even if you drew three times the usual number of complete nonsense reports, you still wouldn't trigger a Tribunal case at all.

Quote:
What do?

Sample pool of games that appear in Tribunal cases have to be expanded. I got banned lately with only one game on my case, how do you expect people to judge me based on one game? It shouldn't be less than 5 games for anyone.

Pro of this: This will increase reliability of Tribunal and it will be easy to voters to decide on cases.

Con of this: I don't see any.
The con is that it takes people longer to read Tribunal cases, so fewer people participate, or those who do get through fewer cases a day.

It also becomes necessary to keep game logs for longer to give a sufficiently large pool to make a Tribunal case against infrequent players.

Quote:
There should be a "punishment meter" that's selectable on cases. Voters might think "well this guy isn't that bad maybe give him a week or something" on some cases, but what if he was at the edge of getting a permaban? In my opinion punishment order shouldn't be fixed for all people, different offenses should have different weights. Current system is like this, you kill someone, you get sentenced for 1 day, then you steal a potato, life sentence. How is that supposed to be fair? If you've never got banned before, even excessive racism won't get you permabanned. But if you've got banned before, slightest thing might get you permabanned.

Pro of this: This feature will help excessively abusive people get permabanned really quickly and prevent people from getting permabanned from "little" offenses even if they got banned several times in the past.

Con of this: It will encourage some people to troll since they will think they can get away with temporary bans, to fix this temporary ban durations should be changed or manually given to players that got temporarily banned in the past. After all that's not a con.
This adds a significant amount of complexity to the Tribunal process, and its not clear how much of a benefit it would provide. But I don't think it would be so bad an idea.

Quote:
Report explanation should be obligatory with minimum letter limit, currently most of reports in game happen due to rage and hate. LOL THIS GUY IS SO IDIOT BETTER REPORT HIM FOR ANYTHING SO HE GETS BANNED. Wrong. You have to describe why you are reporting him.

Pro of this: It will stop rage reports and will make it easier for voters to decide on cases. "This guy got reported for intentional feeding but his score isn't that bad..." Explanation would be great there.

Con of this: Some lazy people won't report abusers but that's those lazy people's problem if they don't mind playing with trolls.
I don't see the benefit of this. Many reports are self-explanatory. Tribunal judges should look at the whole game anyway, and will find the reason or not, and vote accordingly. Remember, the Tribunal is deciding if the reporting player properly upholds the Code, not if the report is valid or not.

In fact, I'd endorse the opposite idea. Cut back on the report options. Leave it to three. Name, chat behavior, and gameplay behavior. That's it. Descriptions optional, if there's something you need to mention.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Auspexa

Member

01-04-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinKillBear View Post
Hi! I would like to say thank you for making a thoughtful post. I dont agree with many of your ideas, but I dont want you to take it the wrong way. I just have a different opinion on the issues.

1) In regards to needing 5 games for a case to exist: I do not believe this is necessary. The major reason being that Riot has said once you make it to the tribunal it only takes one game of punishable behavior for you to vote "punish". If that one game is punishable you deserve to be punished. It actually helps borderline cases to have fewer cases shown as 1 case has a better chance of not being toxic than 5 games of not having one instance of punishable behavior.

2) The punishment meter I dont this is necessary. The fact is the tribunal makes no decision in terms of what type of punishment you receive. This is based on the amount of times you have been punished previously by the tribunal. If you have already been suspended 4 times already and continue to display bad behavior in game you should not be treated any different than other offenders. Bad behavior is bad behavior.

3) I do not disagree with an explanation being required for reports.
1. I find the idea of judging someone based on only one game ridiculous no matter what he did.

2. This is why it's bad, you said it yourself. Not every bad behavior is same.


123