You won't be banned for having bad games

First Riot Post
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Cloak

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

Senior Member

11-22-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by LargeSnorlax View Post
Oh? Based on?

I wasn't aware you had additional information the rest of us don't. Link?
Additional information on what? Who else would report something like, something that isn't worth fretting over. There are actual toxic players out there, and then there are cases like this. When you lump the 2 together, you get a weird margin inbetween, that really screws up the judgemental pendulum that is constantly swinging. I don't think the Tribunal was supposed to get rid of people who are mildly annoying, or aren't good at the game. It's for those that abuse others, and consistently put people down without any trace of improvement.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Truly Outrageous

Senior Member

11-22-2012

http://na.leagueoflegends.com/tribun.../5963260/#nogo

Yeah I dunno about that one. These two cases in a void are virtually the same, right down to the self deprecating comments which are apparently extremely negative and banworthy and the one game which could be viewed as uncommunicative/uncooperative. I mean, I would've pardoned that one too but the voters want what they want.

I do agree that I see way too many "how in the world was this a pardon?" cases slip by as well, though. And of course 10/10 might have been a slight bit of hyperbole lol


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LargeSnorlax

Senior Member

11-22-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEndResults View Post
Additional information on what? Who else would report something like, something that isn't worth fretting over. There are actual toxic players out there, and then there are cases like this. When you lump the 2 together, you get a weird margin inbetween, that really screws up the judgemental pendulum that is constantly swinging. I don't think the Tribunal was supposed to get rid of people who are mildly annoying, or aren't good at the game. It's for those that abuse others, and consistently put people down without any trace of improvement.
Well, I agree with you on that - It's to limit the people that abuse others and consistently put people down. However, it's apparently also to limit people who are consistently negative and make the playing experience awful for their teammates.

Let's put it this way - I'm a normal guy, I work 50 hour weeks. When I come home, after I've cleaned up, gotten some dinner cooking, gotten all nice and set up for some relaxing time at home, and maybe log into League of Legends, do I want to log into a game and see some guy trolling with 6 boots? Nope. Do I want to see some guy constantly whining about how he can't win his lane? Talking in all chat all game to the enemies instead of playing? Feeding and mouthing off afterwards? Do I want a guy who's constantly losing his lane and apologizing constantly instead of playing?

The answer is nope nope nope. So, if the person's bad enough, I might report him. Same with pretty much anyone who does the same as me. This guy gets reported a LOT. He's gotten in half a dozen cases where he's been banned. He KNOWS why he's been banned. He's *slowly* improving his behaviour, but obviously it isn't quick enough.

All he really has to do at this point is follow some of the suggestions people have made, and just chillax in games. No more pointing out flaws in teammates, no more yelling in chat, no more whining about how you can't beat anyone and how you're underfed, one simple way to do it.

Just play the game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LargeSnorlax

Senior Member

11-22-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Storytime Mouse View Post
http://na.leagueoflegends.com/tribun.../5963260/#nogo

Yeah I dunno about that one. These two cases in a void are virtually the same, right down to the self deprecating comments which are apparently extremely negative and banworthy and the one game which could be viewed as uncommunicative/uncooperative. I mean, I would've pardoned that one too but the voters want what they want.

I do agree that I see way too many "how in the world was this a pardon?" cases slip by as well, though. And of course 10/10 might have been a slight bit of hyperbole lol
Yes, I was just bugging you on the hyperbole really

Like I mentioned - There really isn't a LOT wrong with his recent case - But it's hardly the biggest one in the world I've ever seen slip by. He's still being negative and still obviously irritating his teammates, which obviously irritated the tribunal viewers who pressed the button.

Just has to chill out and play instead of allchat talking and complaining.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Truly Outrageous

Senior Member

11-22-2012

Do you know if they actually do reverse punishments? For instance, if in the case you posted (although it was only a warning), should this person contact support and try to appeal this case would that be overturned assuming they have no toxic background? Would it still be justified to say "well you were a little hard on yourself and you didn't use the chat in that one game"? I do believe I've seen pardons overturned so I would assume even if it's done through private means it probably does happen regularly. If the system has some flexibility I guess I can't be too concerned about it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LargeSnorlax

Senior Member

11-22-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Storytime Mouse View Post
Do you know if they actually do reverse punishments? For instance, if in the case you posted (although it was only a warning), should this person contact support and try to appeal this case would that be overturned assuming they have no toxic background? Would it still be justified to say "well you were a little hard on yourself and you didn't use the chat in that one game"? I do believe I've seen pardons overturned so I would assume even if it's done through private means it probably does happen regularly. If the system has some flexibility I guess I can't be too concerned about it.
This is actually a really interesting question. I'm not even sure.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

GunflameSmurf

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

Senior Member

11-22-2012

Lyte since you are around... What's the % of games reported per player for RANKED SOLO QUEUE only?

You said the average player is reported in about 1% of the games. It makes no sense that every single game people is asking to report 1 or more players in ranked queue. I should be "seeing" a reportable player once every 5-10 games instead I see people asking to report others in about 8/10 games (at the very least).


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LargeSnorlax

Senior Member

11-22-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunflameSmurf View Post
Lyte since you are around... What's the % of games reported per player for RANKED SOLO QUEUE only?

You said the average player is reported in about 1% of the games. It makes no sense that every single game people is asking to report 1 or more players in ranked queue. I should be "seeing" a reportable player once every 5-10 games instead I see people asking to report others in about 8/10 games (at the very least).
I'm going out on a limb here and saying the average person in ranked gets about 3-5% reports - Lyte stated a while back mine was around 2%, I play a LOT of ranked games, and I also play a lot of games with 5 friends, so average those out (highly doubt anyone reports me in arranged 5s) and you'd probably get 3-5%.

Ranked has people with tempers flaring a lot less than normals and in theory people who "care" (a strong term, given some players) about winning the game, so you'll get a lot of "Report X" people. Whether or not they report, or whether or not their reports are worth anything is usually something different.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Suscipio

Member

11-22-2012

@Lyte
Dr. Lyte,
This was indeed a false positive case. However I agree that external factors lead to you not overturning the ban. The question is should we unban them just because the Tribunal case was wrong? Time and time again have we seen "Second Chancers" quickly revert to the same toxic gameplay and quickly return to the Tribunal.

I agree that many people that are banned are trying to "game the system" by showing false positive tribunal cards and saying "See the games are totally clean I should be unbanned." But maybe we should give them a second chance because, in my eyes, there are two outcomes:
1.They revert their toxic ways and become a good summoner to play against
2.They quickly get reported again and are banned once again by the tribunal.

Statistically the chances of getting two edge cases after another are very very unlikely.

I know that you and your team has a lot more information about the player than the tribunal gives. However I feel that a lot of players are frustrated that there is not more transparency in the banning methods your team uses. I understand that as a company you can run it anyway you want. Plenty of companies already ban without much transparency: Blizzard, Nexon, Jagex, Activision. I applaud Riot Games and the initiative you took with the Tribunal which allows players more insight with the reform cards. Perhaps your team should increase the transparency of the system to show that your bans are justified to the fullest extent. If the aforementioned is not possible then the summoner going through the tribunal again would provide the visible evidence to the community.

There is always a question of economic and player benefit. Maybe it doesn't benefit the community to be more transparent. Perhaps it just isn't economically feasible to be more transparent. I don't have an answer to these questions but I feel it needs to be considered.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sharkb8

Senior Member

11-22-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
This is why it's important to have this discussion. Let's say Tribunal Case A is 'pardonable,' but happens to be punished by the playerbase. Riot reviews the case and finds out that the player does deserve a punishment. Should we unban the player because of the Tribunal Case details and let the player damage the playerbase further? Or, are we responsible for his actions and have to say "Reform Cards aren't perfect yet and we're going to maintain this ban because we believe the player is toxic."

There's no correct answer here, we debate questions like these everyday.
Yes Lyte, I believe there is a correct answer here.

"Reform Cards aren't perfect yet and we're going to maintain this ban because we believe the player is toxic."

Your Private Company, Your Rules, right? We all agree to play by these rules in order to play this game. With this in mind: Riot reviews a case-maybe bumped up in the forums or something. The case was voted a punish-and say a warning was given, that's all. Well, after Riot reviews the case, and looks at other things the Tribunal doesn't have access to, like pre and post game chat, other games that weren't randomly picked, they decide to ban the player instead of letting the warning ride. Maybe they found severe racism, just blatant horrible behavior. Riot should overall have the final say, no matter what the conclusion the community comes to. Only the people with the most information can make the most informed decision.

However, make sure contacting the banned player and giving them examples is included once the ban is given.