92% accuracy by only voting punish

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Koelio

Senior Member

01-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimpyloser View Post
I am not a scumbag so I of course don't just click punish, but I went through my last 100 cases, did the math, and had I done nothing but punish, I'd have 92% accuracy. Based on my review of the cases I pardon that are punished, it is clear that a large number of people are using the spam punish tactic for improved accuracy and rating. I'll keep taking the accuracy hits and keep doing the right thing, but this concerns me greatly. What is also concerning are the more recent comments by Wookie, regarding a few cases in which the cases presented to the tribunal did not warrant punishment. Wookie often researches the punished player and finds games which are not in the tribunal that would warrant a punishment in order to justify the failure of the tribunal system. The Tribunal is suppose to vote based on the evidence presented to them and finding games outside of the tribunal's level of access to justify why a player was incorrectly punished is not really a valid argument in my opinion. The problem here seems to be tribunal members spamming punish.
I always got the impression that Wookie was saying, "These reports are legit because of post/pre game chat and while the Information provided to the Tribunal seemed not enough to warrant a punish, we are standing behind it because we would have punished this player ourselves anyway."

I've never really gotten the impression he was trying to defend the Tribunal per se, just explaining why the verdict was upheld


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Xcopy

Senior Member

01-13-2013

It's a joke.

Look at this:

http://na.leagueoflegends.com/tribun.../6019047/#nogo


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Rykerr

Junior Member

01-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcopy View Post
Oh my God. Seriously?

People get banned for "playing bad" and this sort of thing is considered pardonable?

Starting to think tribunal voters just can't read.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Xcopy

Senior Member

01-13-2013

Exactly, that is about as bannable a report as you can get and yet he got pardoned yet people are being banned for playing poorly.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Shelzin

Senior Member

01-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by KimKelley View Post
Or that the Algorithm that gets you into the Tribunal is 78.7% accurate. I guess it just depends on your interpretation.

Also, lol at spamming punish yourself.
Yep.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fudouri

Senior Member

01-13-2013

I'm the 14k cases guy.

Attached are some screenshots of the outputs of my analysis, not really sure what sort of "data" you would like to see to prove i've actually looked at that many cases (its all automated).


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Rykerr

Junior Member

01-13-2013

Something I'm having trouble with is when there's four pages of reports on someone (which is usually a sign) and of those, ONE he was clearly having a bad game and got a bit verbal with their team... the others were superfluous, silly things that I don't agree with (feeding when they only died four times in the game, that sort of thing).

Do you vote punish because 1/4 reports was accurate?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Shelzin

Senior Member

01-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rykerr View Post
Something I'm having trouble with is when there's four pages of reports on someone (which is usually a sign) and of those, ONE he was clearly having a bad game and got a bit verbal with their team... the others were superfluous, silly things that I don't agree with (feeding when they only died four times in the game, that sort of thing).

Do you vote punish because 1/4 reports was accurate?
Yes I do. Yes... Almost all the judges are that way.

The system is actually set up to help the person in the tribunal by allowing us to only see 1 to 5 cases. If it's a single bad game they have some horrible luck with that one game getting in.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Rykerr

Junior Member

01-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shelzin View Post
Yes I do. Yes... Almost all the judges are that way.

The system is actually set up to help the person in the tribunal by allowing us to only see 1 to 5 cases. If it's a single bad game they have some horrible luck with that one game getting in.
It was extremely bad luck. I seriously stared at the monitor for five minutes and shook my head, because there was only one report that made sense. The rest was just ...wrong.

I ended up pardoning but I'm sure it'll get punished. I stand by my convictions. If he had been an ignorant racist, I probably would have leaned more towards punishment, but honestly, it looked like one bad game threw him over the edge and he let himself go a little bit. It happens.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Filthy Meadows

Senior Member

01-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calys Teneb View Post
What's hilarious is I have 92% accuracy and I pardon and punish appropriately, and I get nearly every pardon correct with the majority.

Come at me OP.
that just means that you punish too much, if you get the same accuracy as this guy, you are spamming punish