Tribunal-Offensive and Verbal Abuse

12345 ... 7
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

BlarghMuffins

Member

07-04-2011

Warning: Might type a wall of text.

The Tribunal
The Tribunal is a jury-type system made to produce a positive influence. Most people don't understand this trait since they don't understand the purpose of the Tribunal. Some people pardon some people for offensive language and verbal abuse, since Riot uses a language filter and an ignore command. However, these methods do not and will not influence peoples attitude. People ignore the fact that everyone that plays this game agreed to Riot's policies and rules. The ignorance of people led to the coming of the Tribunal.

Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Speech is a horrible counter arguement to allowing these offences go on. This political standard only allows for public speeches and public ignorance to go in public areas. The standard no longer applies to private property or rules set by a group of people that own a public place or thing that the group privately owns. Riot had set rules in both the tribunal and the summoner's code. Every and all players of the game have once agreed to the summoner's code, though the code that Riot set falls on deaf ears here and there. People who live in a democratic government misunderstands the standard and expect that they have the right to have such freedom in a public game owned privately to Riot.

Communism
Communism is an economic standard set to please the poor and lazy. People mistake this meaning for a political standard like Freedom of Speech. They compare these rights in a sense that they seem one and the same.

Money and Paying
People think that Riot is a money grubbing company that allows people that payed be safe and secure despite their actions. This led to people thinking that they have freedom from the laws and rules that democratic governments and Riot had laid down. If Riot were such a company, this game would not be free to play. Riot is an honest company that strives for a popular and friendly community. This misunderstanding led to the opposite of what Riot strives for.

Misunderstandings
Despite Riot wanting a community above, they made flaws in the jury system that led the the misunderstanding of "trolls". The link below describes what Riot should introduce into the Tribunal to better mend the misunderstandings. http://http://www.leagueoflegends.co...d.php?t=904683

Personally, I agree that these offences should not be tolerated. Thus, I ranted on this topic that most people should understand.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mísanthropic

Member

07-04-2011

Ban them all until there's no one left playing the game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

JohnADreams

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

Senior Member

07-04-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus In A Speedo View Post
Ban them all until there's no one left playing the game.
No one is arguing this. They just want to throw the ragers and trolls out, which is not everybody.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kaedan

Senior Member

07-04-2011

Zeus... if you haven't been banned (as you claim)... why are you fighting so hard against this? Those who act mature in game have nothing but good to gain from Tribunal. So why are you hellbent on bashing it? Certainly there are ways to improve it, but it's also certainly not broken.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mísanthropic

Member

07-04-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaedan View Post
Zeus... if you haven't been banned (as you claim)... why are you fighting so hard against this? Those who act mature in game have nothing but good to gain from Tribunal. So why are you hellbent on bashing it? Certainly there are ways to improve it, but it's also certainly not broken.
It's my way of protesting. I just don't trust the players. one. BIT. My in-game experiences taught me so, and knowing just how malevolent players are capable of being drives me to this point. It drives me to the point of rising above all the down-votes and tantalization's. I'll swim against all currents for the sake of protecting my account from abuse!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kaedan

Senior Member

07-04-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus In A Speedo View Post
It's my way of protesting. I just don't trust the players. one. BIT. My in-game experiences taught me so, and knowing just how malevolent players are capable of being drives me to this point. It drives me to the point of rising above all the down-votes and tantalization's. I'll swim against all currents for the sake of protecting my account from abuse!

But players aren't the ones banning people... so you really don't have a leg to stand on with that argument. They haven't automated it yet (they won't unless they are satisfied that the players votes are in-line with the decisions by CSRs), so there is no "abuse" by malevolent players. In fact... people making false reports is doing nothing but help Riot figure out of people are using the system responsibly.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mísanthropic

Member

07-04-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaedan View Post
But players aren't the ones banning people... so you really don't have a leg to stand on with that argument. They haven't automated it yet (they won't unless they are satisfied that the players votes are in-line with the decisions by CSRs), so there is no "abuse" by malevolent players. In fact... people making false reports is doing nothing but help Riot figure out of people are using the system responsibly.
What qualifies as "satisfying" for Riot? I personally think they may be inclined to shift over to fully-automated even if there are too many false-positives because it'll save them from doing extra manual labor.. There's also no prove that the Tribunal ISN'T automated. There HAS been a couple outcries here on these threads already about double-bannings, which indicates to me that they were in fact "automated".

So, if the Tribunal is "automated", and only arbitrary samples of cases are ever manually taken and dealt with by Riot [if they even bother really doing this at all], then even still they'd be going with the "majority vote" in the cases they didn't sample or cover, which does INDEED imply that the players [to a degree] are the ones directly responsible at LEAST for the majority of the [automated] bans. So yes, I DO have a leg to stand on. There're too many unknowns, and too much "hearsay" on Riot's side that lacks proof or substance for me to digest as "truth".

...and you say there's no abuse by malevolent players. Yet you don't have even a morsel of evidence...? You just "assume" that they're carrying out what they've told the community? Well I've got news for you! If even the President himself, or politicians, lawyers, business CEOs, etc.. are capable of lying or withholding "truth" and/or overriding/subverting the will of the people themselves, then do you think for even a split-nano-second! ...that Riot's not equally capable of such things? I'd rather be a skeptic until PROVEN otherwise!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kaedan

Senior Member

07-04-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus In A Speedo View Post
What qualifies as "satisfying" for Riot? I personally think they may be inclined to shift over to fully-automated even if there are too many false-positives because it'll save them from doing extra manual labor.. There's also no prove that the Tribunal ISN'T automated. There HAS been a couple outcries here on these threads already about double-bannings, which indicates to me that they were in fact "automated".

So, if the Tribunal is "automated", and only arbitrary samples of cases are ever manually taken and dealt with by Riot [if they even bother really doing this at all], then even still they'd be going with the "majority vote" in the cases they didn't sample or cover, which does INDEED imply that the players [to a degree] are the ones directly responsible at LEAST for the majority of the [automated] bans. So yes, I DO have a leg to stand on. There're too many unknowns, and too much "hearsay" on Riot's side that lacks proof or substance for me to digest as "truth".

No, you don't have a leg to stand on. Again, your whole argument is poised on the tip of the "bannings are automated" assumption.

-You have no evidence that bannings are automated. Double bannings =/= automation.

-Riot has said that they aren't automated.

Sorry, but just as I "believe" a scientist who tells me the Earth is billions of years old over a fundamentalist who tells me it's 6,000 years old... I'm going to take Riot's word over your assumption.


Quote:
...and you say there's no abuse by malevolent players. Yet you don't have even a morsel of evidence...? You just "assume" that they're carrying out what they've told the community? Well I've got news for you! If even the President himself, or politicians, lawyers, business CEOs, etc.. are capable of lying or withholding "truth" and/or overriding/subverting the will of the people themselves, then do you think for even a split-nano-second! ...that Riot's not equally capable of such things? I'd rather be a skeptic until PROVEN otherwise!
Sorry, reversal of the burden of proof game doesn't work with me. Status quo is status quo. The person who is arguing against the status quo is the one with the burden of proof here.

You also twisted my words. I said that because the system is not automated, your claim that there is abuse by judges in the Tribunal is unfounded. I readily admit that there are players making false reports. But I also recognize that it's actually a good thing that they are, because then Riot can test the accuracy of the Tribunal judges.

I'm sorry to say, but there is a difference between skepticism and conspiracy theory. You are leaning far closer to the latter.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mísanthropic

Member

07-04-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaedan View Post
No, you don't have a leg to stand on. Again, your whole argument is poised on the tip of the "bannings are automated" assumption.

-You have no evidence that bannings are automated. Double bannings =/= automation.

-Riot has said that they aren't automated.

Sorry, but just as I "believe" a scientist who tells me the Earth is billions of years old over a fundamentalist who tells me it's 6,000 years old... I'm going to take Riot's word over your assumption.



Sorry, reversal of the burden of proof game doesn't work with me. Status quo is status quo. The person who is arguing against the status quo is the one with the burden of proof here.

You also twisted my words. I said that because the system is not automated, your claim that there is abuse by judges in the Tribunal is unfounded. I readily admit that there are players making false reports. But I also recognize that it's actually a good thing that they are, because then Riot can test the accuracy of the Tribunal judges.

I'm sorry to say, but there is a difference between skepticism and conspiracy theory. You are leaning far closer to the latter.
You have no evidence either, only hearsay. That to me equates to untruth.

"...but Riot has said..." =/= "Truth" unless there's evidence to prove it! I stand by my word.

I don't care what your beliefs are; they're your "beliefs", not mine. I'm not a fundamentalist, so don't label me as such [you don't know me]. And if you take Riot's words over any and everything, then you my friend are naive, and are subjecting yourself to their potential for dissimulation. You believe what you want, but I stand firm in mine just as sternly as you do in yours.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kaedan

Senior Member

07-04-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus In A Speedo View Post
You have no evidence either, only hearsay. That to me equates to untruth.

"...but Riot has said..." =/= "Truth" unless there's evidence to prove it! I stand by my word.

I don't care what your beliefs are; they're your "beliefs", not mine. I'm not a fundamentalist, so don't label me as such [you don't know me]. And if you take Riot's words over any and everything, then you my friend are naive, and are subjecting yourself to their potential for dissimulation. You believe what you want, but I stand firm in mine just as sternly as you do in yours.

You still don't get it. Heresay from a reputable company is still more evidence than a complete lack of evidence (which is what you have).

The problem is there isn't any "anything and everything". If there was even one ounce of evidence to the contrary, I would question it... but there isn't. There is no reason to believe that Riot is lying, and there is no evidence that is contrary to their statement. In that case, the rational and yes, even skeptical route to take is to accept it as fact until proven otherwise.


Oh, and it's off-topic, but I wasn't calling you a fundamentalist... it was part of the example. Not related to you.


12345 ... 7