Summoners who verbally abuse their team lose 16% more games.

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

Eiales

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

Senior Member

12-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by RiotDerivative View Post
Thanks! I appreciate it. New around here and have to remember I am not talking to stuffy statisticians :-).
Riot may not be inferring anything, but like you say the players consist mostly of non-staisticians who are easily fooled into making that mistake. From the way you present the information it has to be assuled that such is your intention. While the goal (reducing verbal abuse) is admirable, what you are doing is on the same level as setting up and knocking down a strawman argument. I'm sure it looks good, but the moment anyone brimgs it up in a discussion they also present an excellent opportunity to discredit the data and derail the discussion.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Amariithynar

Senior Member

12-27-2012

On the other hand, do you really think that anyone who is intelligent enough to actually catch that correlation =! causation will not also be intelligent enough to know that when raging they do in fact perform worse due to high emotional negative response rather than calm rational thought? in short, if they don't crack under pressure they perform better, and hurling abuse at the team is one such form of cracking under the pressure and venting frustration- It may be short term comforting because you lash out, but in the long run it is a double-sided negative hurting your teammates having tod eal with the abuse and causing discord among your team as well, breaking down communications et al.

In short: those who need to be told simply to modify their behaviour to win see it and react, and it cleans up the community in general as well. certainly it's a strawman argument, but its very purpose is blindingly obvious to anyone with the wits to question it in the same breath.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KiStorm

Senior Member

12-27-2012

"Summoners who verbally abuse their team lose 16% more games."

It states that person A loses 16% more games because of behaviour B.

So people who are verbally abusive lose more, yet society doesn't self moderate.

We need to step in and fix it because we have your back and you are not allowed to self-moderate, despite entire games being lost as a result of one person verbally abusing their team.

If you just let us black list we'd be fine, not only could someone who was dubiously feeding and considered to be doing so intentionally be put on my banlist as there is no reason to report other than suspicion, I could black list people poking me, black list noobies who i thought were doing so intentionally.

I literally wont even give a feeder a second thought unless it is apparent they have thrown a tantrum and decided to run past turrets screaming "Leeeeeeroy Jenkins!" But in situations where I do not feel the benefit of the doubt is relevant and a player is consistently appearing to assist the enemy team through position, playing and use of skills/lack thereof, at the worst I'm blacklisting a new player who isn't on a similar skill level.

The worst consequence of this would be not allowing room for a developing player to play with me upon becoming practiced, thus a reset would be a good idea, its easy to know who to blacklist and the serious flaw here is you would rather a computer system decide who i'm matched with, value lack of ELO abuse more than actually stopping vendettas in their tracks (once everyones blacklisted you there is no one to troll, youre stuck until reset) but you wont enact a system like this because people can use it to blacklist others to gain an advantage, yet its used to simply stop me being paired with people giving me a horrible experience, with a small deviation of players who are actually not throwing the game and simply suck on that day.

So in a nutshell, you wont let us blacklist because of ELO gain mechanics, yet it would give us power over our abusers. (The power to avoid and ignore).

Am I asking too much for you to even consider this, or do you just not care about anything but "winning"?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Raphael JR

Senior Member

12-27-2012

For your win rate it seriously does not matter are you gonna be an jerk or not,if you are good you will do good..
i try most of the time to be nice,but there are people so stupid in this game that makes me smash my pc with a head...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KiStorm

Senior Member

12-27-2012

Reasons to add personal banlist- abusers, throwers, flaming, trolling.
Reasons to not add a personal banlist- abuse of ELO mechanics, Matchmaking struggling, anything that involves effort to fix and doesn't value empowering the person over their antagonists.

In life, empowering the people is not about giving them weapons, it's about teaching them they can implement change peacefully, a weak person can use a weapon (abuse) just as easily as a strong person, a strong person however cannot overpower a weak person with the power to ignore.

Yet a strong person using abuse as a weapon can easily cause them anguish in a game through betrayal, the capability to avoid them entirely denies them even this small vestige of power, empowers even the weak minded to avoid and ignore them in the face of abuse they cannot compete with nor counteract, anguish they can not cope with and simply allowing them to add a naughty list with both features of ignore and avoid stops them needing either to recognize their antagonists on a level of "Did u ignore for possibly game-throwing or abuse" allows "Ignore reason" and "Ban reason" so possible game-throwers can be confirmed or denied along with the players who you know may cause you anguish in future matched games as a revenge will not be present in any of your games due to being banned for "This guy talks about my mum, never match me with this person again".


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

FineyLeee

Senior Member

12-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by RiotDerivative View Post
You are correct that correlation != causation, but it can be assumed that this statistic was computed from a population. That is, this statement comes straight from the data and is not an inference about future data.
The statement still implies that the summoners lose games BECAUSE they verbally abuse their team mates, whereas I believe it's likely the other way around: The abuse generally doesn't start until the team is already losing.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KiStorm

Senior Member

12-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrongwayz View Post
For your win rate it seriously does not matter are you gonna be an jerk or not,if you are good you will do good..
i try most of the time to be nice,but there are people so stupid in this game that makes me smash my pc with a head...
Nah theres many ways to look at it, people are jerks because/when there are feeders hence often verbal abuse ties in to more losses.
Or: People are jerks and throw off teams focus or comradery and are more tied in to a loss.

Either way, out of 100 losses, 16 of them contain abuse which is an astronomical figure as for each 100 losses there are 100 victories so in 200 games there will be 16 verbally abusive players thus 8% of matchmade games contain verbal abuse.

That figure is horrible, really.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

rainzer

Senior Member

12-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by SubzeroKelvin View Post
Translation: OP is right, Riot makes no conclusion from this data, we just present it.
I'd like to have the data be publicly visible before accepting it as truth based on the basic truths of causation and correlation.

If that is not feasible, at least provide a much more detailed explanation on how this 16% value is determined because it is very easily believable that a losing team is more likely to be verbally abusive than a non-losing team. As such, at what point is it determined that the abuse was independent of the game condition and thus affected it rather than caused by the game condition.

I doubt that the data was looked at so thoroughly to make this determination. Given the number of players and thusly the number of games played, it is much more likely that a simple search of verbal abuse and losses were tallied and then presented as connected. Anyone could give anecdotal evidence about how they had miracle games of being super nice and helpful and caused comebacks, but an equal number could likely give a story of a game of being nice where it didn't turn the tide of the game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Alphazonex

Senior Member

12-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by natemiddleman2 View Post
I agree with the op. Please change the wording of this as it does not makes sense. Verbal abuse is usually the effect not the cause.

Players are 16% more likely to lose if they verbally abuse their teammates
When players lose they are 16% more likely to verbally abuse their teammates
Well to be honest, if someone IS verbally abused by their team mates, there is a chance that person will purposely throw/quit/afk/ect just to spite the people that verbally abused them. When this happens, it can result in the loss of a game because the people that abused them get frustrated themselves and begin to play rashly due to morale being lowered. They simply start to not care about winning anymore. Seen this happen a lot of times myself.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Patroks

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

Senior Member

12-27-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by RiotDerivative View Post
Thanks! I appreciate it. New around here and have to remember I am not talking to stuffy statisticians :-).
Look at your Riot icon from the corner of your eye. You now see IronStylus' pic.