Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.


3 Years Played, 4000+ Games, 2000+ Elo, And Perma Banned [LONG POST]

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.


Senior Member


nerds need to understand THERE IS AN IGNORE FEATURE IF SOMEONE IS HURTING UR WEAK FEELING PLZ HIT THE IGNORE BUBBLE AND CONTINUE TO PLAY BADLY. Toxic players that need to be banned are those who feed on purpose. Pretty much case closed. This is the reason the tribunal is being done away with in favor of a more logical automated system

LoL, its not.

Also, the system has been remarkably effective.

Please show me where the tribunal is going away?

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.


Senior Member


Op While I can certainly empathize with your statements and I've gotten frustrated in some of my recent matches after taking a long break and running to some complete *******, rage quitters, afkers, feeders, ragers etc there is a point where self control has to take over.

Those who vote in tribunal as you well know don't decide the ban length, that's setup by Riot we only determine whether we feel the person in question is guilty based upon the evidence in question and on whether it violates the summoners code etc.

I'd have voted punish with some understanding of the circumstances of what he was going through and seeing mitigating in the non toxic games.
Game 1 Sating surrender at 20 doesn't look so good early suggests negativity, but not punishable by itself, the trash talking mid game is fine and nothing wrong with that, 27 mins in starts insulting Graves (understand the frustration) borderline now but still wouldn't punish, the 40 min mark you really start to lose it and I'd prob punish if only that game was the 1 to judge on.

Game 2 Definitely some negativity here, leaning punish but want more to see to make sure.

Game 3 As you said had nothing to see, doesn't mean the chat wasn't toxic or that he wasn't an angel in it, only that it didn't show anything.

Game 4 He kept on going after the autism statement that would seem to suggest intent and not joking. Definitely leaning punish.

Game 5 Nothing there definitely a pardon vote on that 1

I'd probably still vote to punish based on the other games since they were overboard enough to warrant punish votes.

Now on to the explanations you gave.

As far as intent we don't know nor do we care if he knows the person and whether they have rage issues or not, we judge on what we see while taking into account what the others in game do, was it a provoked response and then did they stop or did they continue etc.

Unfortunately we don't get to see the whole reform card ie all the past instances of reports as well as the entire body of what Riot has when determining whether or not to perma ban an account. Obviously there was enough toxic behavior that they felt he wasn't going to change.

There's no knowing out of all those games how many he was toxic in and how often the reports were true etc, it would be nice to get a Riot response on this similar to how they used to occasionally for better info in this case.

I'd love to see when a perma ban is handed down they release the entire reform card or better yet a complete listing of all the toxic reports in reform card style or something similar so the evidence is more easy to see what they based their decision off of.

It's unfortunate to have lost so much time and investment and perhaps Riot would be willing to give out a detailed reform card perhaps not, hopefully you'll be able to play again without such issues in the future.