Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.
I don't see anywhere else to put this on this forum, so I'm gonna put this here.
Basically, whenever you're judged by the tribunal, it should let you know. Currently you only know if your account has been punished because you can't log in, but I think people should know their own tribunal report.
First: There would be a new panel in your profile, accessible only by you (much like champions owned), which has a list of every case the tribunal has made against you. In that case file you are told:
1) The number of judges that voted for and against you.
2) The number of times you were reported, and for what.
3) The number of games you were reported on in the case.
4) Any comments the judges wish to leave about your case. Comments are anonymous.
#4 is the most important part. By leaving comments, judges can instruct the player how they can avoid being sent to the tribunal again, or warn them about their behavior that could have or did give them a punish vote.
Second: Whenever you are judged, you are told on login, much like the notification for when you level up and get a new place for masteries and runes.
Additionally (and optionally) if you are deemed innocent:
1) The names of the judges that gave you a pardon, but not those that punished you are displayed unless the judge wishes to judge anonymously. This is so you can give them a thank you.
2) Comments made by pardoning judges may display their names, again, if the judge chooses so.
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.
A couple of threads you might be interested in:
Instead of motivating people to be a positive influence in the League of Legends community through rewards, you are attempting to taper negative influence through the Tribunal system. While the effort is appreciated, it is not working. I do not have the means or access to provide a statistical analysis confirming this. However, a simple litmus test can be performed by joining a game and typing the word "reported." The mocking which ensues from 12-year-old nerds should provide sufficient verification.
Interestingly, it is specifically because of the lack of tangible results that the tribunal system is perceived as a failure. And a threat which is perceived as a failure by those subject to it ultimately IS a failure--a hollow threat.
The most insufferable player joins a game. He trolls, feeds, whines, griefs, moans, insults --you name it. His actions are so blatantly unacceptable that all other players report him. Then what? Maybe he gets punished. Maybe he doesn't. Regardless of the outcome, the people who endured him will get nothing out of it. No participation in the tribunal. No assurance that some form of justice was inflicted. No compensation for indignities suffered. Nothing to suggest that it won't happen again, even in the very next game.
It takes a lot of work to be nice to others, to be respectful, to be a team player, and to be a positive influence. Without any promise of gain or loss directly related to that influence, people are wondering, "Why bother?" So they can be fan boys in the forums and sign The Summoner's Code? Pass. To earn a few pats on the back by anonymous strangers on the way out the door? Meh. For the effect it may have on their chances of winning? Sure, maybe, but playing the game it's easy to see that's not enough to motivate positive influence.
I was just reviewing Riot's "The Tribunal Totally Works!" post here:
Far be it from me to suggest some conspiracy theory, but I'm doubtful of the touted success. No, I don't think they're providing false statistics. I simply think that, regardless of what the Tribunal is actually accomplishing, they're going to come out and announce success and provide a few statistics which might justify that stance. It's propaganda.
I would like to make a few comments on these statistics.
1.4% of all players have been punished by The Tribunal.
In your experience playing this game, are only 1.4% of players worthy of some form of punishment? That means you only encounter one person (from either team) who negatively impacts your gameplay experience once out of every eight matches (Classic Mode). Is that an accurate representation?
Over 50% of all punished players never reoffend.
That is, they never reoffend to the point of being found "guilty" in another tribunal case. So any offense less than another Tribunal case is acceptable? Moreover, this only means they haven't reoffended yet--not at the time the statistics were gathered.
94% of players who receive enough reports to face the tribunal are punished by their peers.
That's nearly unanimous! So a case only reaches The Tribunal when it's so obviously worthy of punishment that nearly every case is voted the same? Or is the issue that people who weren't involved in the match don't give a hoot about it, and they find that spamming "Punish" is more likely to match others' votes, yielding an IP reward? Anyone see a problem with uninterested and biased jury members?
I do not believe The Tribunal is doing much for us. I think it is doing more for Riot--acting as a shield from accusations that they aren't doing anything to improve the atmosphere.
I previoiusly (see first post) stated that an issue with The Tribunal is that it is a hollow threat. The case may rather be that it could be a good system, but that it is being misapplied.
The Tribunal could be a great system for executing extreme punishment--suspensions or even bans. But it is not a great system for encouraging day-to-day civility among the general populace. If it only caps off very excessive harrassment, it makes the statement that anything less than that is acceptable.
It's like training a dog with an axe. You simply observe and tolerate bad behavior without any intervention, up to a point. If the behavior becomes bad enough, you drop the axe. Dead dog. That's not a reform system. That's not a system of encouraging good behavior. It's a system of discouraging only extremes.
Instead, you should spray the dog in the face with water or kick him in the rear for minor offenses. And you reward him with treats for simple acts of good behavior. That's how you convey what's expected. That's how you produce positive influence, little by little, action by action, or game by game.