92% accuracy by only voting punish

123456 ... 8
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PenguinKillBear

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimpyloser View Post
It isn't. If indeed 92% of the players are guilty then they should be punished. In my experience it's closer to 80% or 8/10 cases I review. Of course guilt and innocence are subjective so for you 92% may warrant punishment and for me only 80%. I think the problem lies in that if you simply click punish, you will have an extremely high accuracy rating. If you are right that 92% deserve to be punished then I think that is too high and actually encourages people to simply click punish without investigating the cases. Perhaps Riot could implement a system in which they automatically generate pardon cases into the system to decrease that percentage. 1/5 cases is an obvious pardon for nonexistent player... Just a thought.
I see. So your major concern is the accuracy rating for the punish spammers being too high?
This may be an issue, but honestly I am not overly concerned with this. Honestly, I think that those that spam punish are an exceedingly small number of people that have small to little impact on the tribunal. I base this largely on how many users use the tribunal as can be seen in how long it takes to break into the top 1000. The top thousand users actively working on cases mitigate the handful of trolls out there. Of course this is all speculation based on what I have observed and think probable.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Exploding Barrel

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinKillBear View Post
Seeing as all players showing up in the tribunal have been reported for having a toxic presence in the game, why is it wrong that 92% of them were actually guilty of just that?
Yeah, this is why just the raw punish number is not really indicative of anything. These are the top 1% most reported players in the game; it stands to reason that most of them are probably guilty.

Discussion of individual cases you would have pardoned but got punished is more indicative of "spamming punish," but as we saw yesterday even the rare case of that sometimes has a larger story behind it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

magooomba

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimpyloser View Post
You always troll me by attempting to destroy the credibility of anything I post. In this case you are somewhat correct. The sample size of 100 cases is too small for a real and accurate study. Clearly this isn't a research project or I'd have done more work. Also I did not link specific cases in which I felt the player was unfairly punished to support the idea that the punishment rate should be less than 92%, although they did exist within the sample. I could have done more to present this topic as a more valid argument, but I did not. I may improve it later if I have time to build a case worthy of the court of Magoo.
Excuse me? Just because I disagree with you, and I point out my disagreements, it does not mean I am trolling you. I pointed out that just because 92% of your cases resulted in punishment, it does not mean that your conclusion is true. I directly refuted your point. This argument is flawed from the premise.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Exploding Barrel

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinKillBear View Post
I see. So your major concern is the accuracy rating for the punish spammers being too high?
This may be an issue, but honestly I am not overly concerned with this. Honestly, I think that those that spam punish are an exceedingly small number of people that have small to little impact on the tribunal. I base this largely on how many users use the tribunal as can be seen in how long it takes to break into the top 1000. The top thousand users actively working on cases mitigate the handful of trolls out there. Of course this is all speculation based on what I have observed and think probable.
Ahh, I was missing that that was the OP's point too.

Yeah, I think that overall the accuracy, streak, and ratings are kinda stupid. I'm glad we can easily see the results of the cases we've voted on now, but giving aggregate ratings based on how much you think like everyone else doesn't sit quite right with me.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gimpyloser

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnfnrf View Post
The overall punishment rate for the Tribunal is around 76% right now.

I didn't check 100 cases to get this, I checked 10,000.

Another guy checked 14,000 and got a slightly higher value (I think closer to 80%).
Do you have the data to substantiate this claim? I'd love to see it if so.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PenguinKillBear

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exploding Barrel View Post
Ahh, I was missing that that was the OP's point too.

Yeah, I think that overall the accuracy, streak, and ratings are kinda stupid. I'm glad we can easily see the results of the cases we've voted on now, but giving aggregate ratings based on how much you think like everyone else doesn't sit quite right with me.
It does somewhat promote people to care more about their rating than accurately voting what they think is best for the case. It promotes the "what will everyone else vote' compared to "what do I think I should vote" mentality.

That said I think most of us doing this frequently do it because we want to, not because we care about the rating.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gimpyloser

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exploding Barrel View Post
Ahh, I was missing that that was the OP's point too.

Yeah, I think that overall the accuracy, streak, and ratings are kinda stupid. I'm glad we can easily see the results of the cases we've voted on now, but giving aggregate ratings based on how much you think like everyone else doesn't sit quite right with me.
Yea the main point I was making is that you can get a decent rating by only punishing. I can't confirm that a specific numbers of players are using this tactic. I can't say for sure how many people in the tribunal deserve punishment because people differ on their views of what is punishable. I don't think it is unreasonable to say that with the punish rate being this high, it could easily lead to more people punishing every case without reading them.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gimpyloser

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinKillBear View Post
It does somewhat promote people to care more about their rating than accurately voting what they think is best for the case. It promotes the "what will everyone else vote' compared to "what do I think I should vote" mentality.

That said I think most of us doing this frequently do it because we want to, not because we care about the rating.
Yea there is that too. My highest streak was 30 and I felt dirty after getting it, because I didn't vote my mind. I analyzed the cases and predicted the community response. Perhaps the discussion should be regarding the removal of a rating system at all.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PenguinKillBear

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimpyloser View Post
Yea the main point I was making is that you can get a decent rating by only punishing. I can't confirm that a specific numbers of players are using this tactic. I can't say for sure how many people in the tribunal deserve punishment because people differ on their views of what is punishable. I don't think it is unreasonable to say that with the punish rate being this high, it could easily lead to more people punishing every case without reading them.
You should take some comfort in know than that their rating will never be as high as others than as only spamming punish will ensure that they will not have as high of streaks as many others voting accurately!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gimpyloser

Senior Member

01-11-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinKillBear View Post
You should take some comfort in know than that their rating will never be as high as others than as only spamming punish will ensure that they will not have as high of streaks as many others voting accurately!
It isn't about the rating. Rating means nothing to me. What concerns me is that it encourages lazy voting. Most of the regulars on this forum can testify to the horror story that is the EU tribunal. Could this be why?


123456 ... 8