Perma banned during my 2 week ban

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

YueienGato

Senior Member

01-29-2013

Cept it is more like the Jury says 10 years, then the Judge decides on the death penalty after coming out of the bathroom with a joint hanging out of his mouth. The context of how that decision was arrived at is my concern.

I am just worried that, at best, this is a Tribunal bug or, at worst, human error in issuing the Perma. This guy is a jerk - no argument here - but he should have been shown the door through the rules Riot themselves have designed. There are a lot of ambigious issues surrounding this case that I would like to be cleared up, else they become a headache for us later when we bring up the competency of the whole, "but every perma bamp is overseen by a Rioter" thing.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Takerial

Senior Member

01-29-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by YueienGato View Post
Cept it is more like the Jury says 10 years, then the Judge decides on the death penalty after coming out of the bathroom with a joint hanging out of his mouth. The context of how that decision was arrived at is my concern.

I am just worried that, at best, this is a Tribunal bug or, at worst, human error in issuing the Perma. This guy is a jerk - no argument here - but he should have been shown the door through the rules Riot themselves have designed. There are a lot of ambigious issues surrounding this case that I would like to be cleared up, else they become a headache for us later when we bring up the competency of the whole, "but every perma bamp is overseen by a Rioter" thing.
What? How is this like the Judge coming out with a joint in his mouth?

I do not get how you jumped to that decision. If he was originally pushed to a two week ban based on Tribunal results. And then Riot decides "You know what, after looking at this he deserves more." then how is that wrong?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

YueienGato

Senior Member

01-29-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Takerial View Post
What? How is this like the Judge coming out with a joint in his mouth?

I do not get how you jumped to that decision. If he was originally pushed to a two week ban based on Tribunal results. And then Riot decides "You know what, after looking at this he deserves more." then how is that wrong?
Because the Tribunal system, at that time, was undergoing updates. From what OP has provided, his perma bamp report has overlap with his 2 week bamp, which means he's been punished for the exact same games.

I've never heard of this happening before and I suspect it is a glitch - hence my reference to the joint as in it has the appearance of it being disjointed (EDIT: Impaired) in its processing of data. What results is that someone has been punished for a glitch - if that is true then the Rioter responsible should have been aware of how it could be perceived that he was arriving at his decision through corrupted data.

Either the Rioter did not care or he did care (as you are saying, which is his right but it still doesn't sit well for me). It just sets a bad precedent in my mind.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Takerial

Senior Member

01-29-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by YueienGato View Post
Because the Tribunal system, at that time, was undergoing updates. From what OP has provided, his perma bamp report has overlap with his 2 week bamp, which means he's been punished for the exact same games.

I've never heard of this happening before and I suspect it is a glitch - hence my reference to the joint as in it has the appearance of it being disjointed in its processing of data. What results is that someone has been punished for a glitch - if that is true then the Rioter responsible should have been aware of how it could be perceived that he was arriving at his decision through corrupted data.

Either the Rioter did not care or he did care (as you are saying, which is his right but it still doesn't sit well for me). It just sets a bad precedent in my mind.
His bad behavior isn't corrupted data. It's plain by everything he's done.

His perma ban does not stem from glitched data. He perma ban results from his constant toxic behavior.

If there WAS a glitch, which there might not be, it was that he was given a 2 week ban prematurely and should have resulted only in a perma ban. But it also could not have been a glitch.

Either way, his perma ban comes from a Rioter going "Dang he's toxic." after looking at his consistent toxic behavior and brought the banhammer down.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

powerbats

Senior Member

01-29-2013

While it might be a bug and you should send in a report ticket it's also inescapable that your currently toxic and haven't changed your ways despite all the warning and temp bans you got and perhaps Riot got some reports sent straight to them that caused them to look over your case file and decide to make it perma ban worthy.

Blaming it on others doesn't work since the 2 wrongs don't make a right is pretty apt here, if your going to agree to the rules you can't decide to break them just because someone else does. It's like saying to the officer who writes you a speeding ticket well officer I was breaking the law because I saw him and him do it as well.

You've only yourself to blame for either responding to the trolls or becoming the same thing you complain about and we all get trolls in games yet most of us don't end up here constantly either.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

YueienGato

Senior Member

01-29-2013

Once again, not arguing the fact that he clearly deserves to be where he is: my concern is how he arrived here.

As far as I'm concerned, there are no problems in the presentation of his 2 week bamp cases: He hangs himself clearly.

It is the in the perma that, as he is serving the 2 week bamp, that he is put forewords through the Tribunal again where data is being reused against him. As I've said, I normally do not go out on a limb here but I have never heard of a situation in which a person goes from 2 week to perma bamp BASED on recycled cases being used against him. This occuring while there is a Tribunal update, which various people have attested to with a delay in case results being pushed through.

I understand the right for a Rioter's perma bamping privilages, but I still am voicing a concern that, in this case, there needs to be some clarity as to the process of how this one case ended up as a Perma while a person is still serving his time.

I reiterate: OP is toxic, he is scum, he is not someone I'd lose sleep over BUT there are some facts, or lack therefore of, that could lead to a potentially unwelcomed precedent. It is a cold day in hell that I go out voicing some doubt over the Tribunal system, but how the process of this particular case *seems* to have occured leaves me quite chilled.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Takerial

Senior Member

01-29-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by YueienGato View Post
Once again, not arguing the fact that he clearly deserves to be where he is: my concern is how he arrived here.

As far as I'm concerned, there are no problems in the presentation of his 2 week bamp cases: He hangs himself clearly.

It is the in the perma that, as he is serving the 2 week bamp, that he is put forewords through the Tribunal again where data is being reused against him. As I've said, I normally do not go out on a limb here but I have never heard of a situation in which a person goes from 2 week to perma bamp BASED on recycled cases being used against him. This occuring while there is a Tribunal update, which various people have attested to with a delay in case results being pushed through.

I understand the right for a Rioter's perma bamping privilages, but I still am voicing a concern that, in this case, there needs to be some clarity as to the process of how this one case ended up as a Perma while a person is still serving his time.

I reiterate: OP is toxic, he is scum, he is not someone I'd lose sleep over BUT there are some facts, or lack therefore of, that could lead to a potentially unwelcomed precedent. It is a cold day in hell that I go out voicing some doubt over the Tribunal system, but how the process of this particular case *seems* to have occured leaves me quite chilled.
? A permaban will always recycle cases because it's based on all the previous evidence.

He ended up permabanned while he was during his 2 week ban because that seems to be the punishment from the Tribunal review whereas the permaban came after a Rioter reviewed it.

There's no glitch that caused him to become permabanned. And there wasn't anything unfair that occurred to get him banned. The only potential glitch, which I don't think occurred, was that a 2 week sentence was released before the scheduled permaban review went on.

But I don't think that occurred.

Regardless of what happened. There was no glitch or falseness that created the permaban. It resulted after the Rioter reviewed all the evidence.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

The Hobo Lord

Senior Member

01-31-2013

I was correctly perma banned. I bet yall are happy, yes rejoice in the retribution, it feels so good. You are the foot and the face, and the foot is smashing the face. Props if you get the reference.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PenguinKillBear

Senior Member

01-31-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hobo Lord View Post
I was correctly perma banned. I bet yall are happy, yes rejoice in the retribution, it feels so good. You are the foot and the face, and the foot is smashing the face. Props if you get the reference.
Many people in here were actually hoping that it was a bug, and would be rectified. Contrary to popular belief many of us do not want people to get banned.

Do you mind sharing with us what you found out, and how you came to know that the ban was correct?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LolMonsterGG

Junior Member

01-31-2013

Same as me. 2week banned turned to a perma ban lol