PBE: Restricted Chat For Toxic Players

12345 ... 8
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

YueienGato

Senior Member

02-21-2013

So this has finally been implimented for testing. Interesting.

Quote:
For a while now, the player behavior team has believed that bans are not the ideal solution for dealing with toxic players in League of Legends. Sometimes a banned player will create a new account and negatively affect the experiences of low level players. During this time, the banned player is not learning what it means to be a positive member in our community.

On the player behavior team, one of our core philosophies is to create features that can help toxic players reform their behavior. We have been working on alternatives to banning, and will begin running experiments on the PBE. Unlike many features on PBE, these experiments will see rapid iterations, and may look completely different when they go live. Some experiments might take two weeks, some might take two months, and some even longer. Running experiments this way on PBE will introduce a new level of transparency in our ongoing player behavior initiatives, and we encourage players to join us in these experiments and shape the future of the League of Legends community.

The first experiment we are trying is a new restricted chat mode. Players that are identified as the most toxic by our player behavior systems will be placed into a restricted chat mode where their ability to participate in [All] Chat is disabled. Also, these players will have a limited number of chat messages they can send to team chat, which will slowly increase over the course of a game. To unlock this restriction on their account, these players must play a set number of matchmade games with positive, non-toxic behavior.

With this experiment, we hope to address a few key issues. First, we hope this will help toxic players to think carefully about their chat messages and what they use them for—if these players still choose to rage, they will immediately hit their message cap and be muted, shielding other players from their harassment. If these players use their available messages responsibly, they can learn to exhibit positive and constructive communication in League of Legends.

Secondly, we hope that by tying the punishment to games played instead of a set duration of time, we can enable toxic players to assume more responsibility for their actions. Players will no longer be able to make new accounts for a few days to escape their timeban—they will have to play matchmade games in restricted chat mode to unlock their account chat privileges again.

This is the first experiment in a series that will all be focused on replacing bans with alternative punishments that encourage players to improve their behaviors, and you will see this feature on PBE shortly.
http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/...1#post34913351

One less excuse for toxic players to use and, hopefully, a tool that can instead be used.

UPDATED MARCH 18 2013

So not sure if anyone has seen this, but latest patch (3.04) has pushed the restricted chat from PBE to live:

Quote:
Quote:
Restricted Chat Mode
In an effort to encourage active reform and shield players from toxicity, we’ve implemented a new account restriction that limits in-game chat for toxic players.

Certain players (identified by Tribunal and by Player Support) will have a limited number of in-game messages available and limited access to [All] Chat.

Restricted players that successfully complete matchmade games will earn their chat privileges back.
This along with Lyte's recent chat about shifting the focus on reforming players instead of just punishing is interesting, to say the least.

http://www.surrenderat20.net/2013/03...cusing-on.html

Updated! Thanks Exploding Barrel for the link http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/...2#post35769412

UPDATED 27/04

Lyte recently talked about the restricted chat 3 months in. http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/...2#post37109652

Quote:
On the player behavior team, we take a lot of risks. We have to because we're often pushing boundaries on what's been tried before in the online community space. We have very little prior history, documentation, or references to learn from so we really have little information on how a player might react in a pressure situation with something like Restricted Chat Mode. We simply take what we can from psychology, cognition and neuroscience and try to make the best decisions given the limited knowledge and data we do have.

We'll make mistakes. I know we will. However, for every experiment, we reveal a few more insights about psychology and a few more insights about human behavior in general. We're going to keep trying new things, and we're going to keep learning--that's all I can ask of the player behavior team.

So far, we've learned a few interesting things already from the Restricted Chat Mode experiment:

1) It is correctly forcing a subset of players to consciously think about their chat resources. At the end of the day, players want to win, and they are learning about the difference between positive chat providing a distinct advantage versus the destructiveness of negative chat. We're mapping out the usage of Restricted Chat Mode, and are interested in seeing things like what ratio of messages are used for cooperation versus destruction. We're also interested in seeing how many games of Restricted Chat Mode is required before a player's personality or character fundamentally improves for the better.

2) A lot of players are self-aware of their own outbursts and rage in games and have asked to opt-in to Restricted Chat Mode voluntarily. This is interesting because for a long time, many developers and game studios have assumed that a lot (if not all) of toxic players simply lack self-awareness--they don't realize that their behaviors are toxic, or that racism isn't OK. However, through Restricted Chat Mode, we're finding a demographic of players that are very self-aware, but need help--they need a nudge in the right direction, and they can't do it alone. I often talk to the player behavior team about whether it's our responsibility to collaborate and work with players in these cases and time and time again, we find that the answer is "Yes."


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Riverstyx201

Senior Member

02-21-2013

Nice. It'll be interesting to see how this turns out.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Reddhero12

Senior Member

02-21-2013

I've suggested this so many times in the past, and got so many downvotes.

Just yesterday I suggested a mute alternative to banning, everyone thought it was a stupid idea. Lol.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

One More Fight

Senior Member

02-21-2013

SUXX.
low priority concept in Dota 2 is far better


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dzyne

Junior Member

02-21-2013

Honestly I feel like this would've been 10x more helpful in terms of calming my behavior than a reform card. Reform card does nothing for me. There's a lot of times where I'll type something, and immediately regret it afterwards and bite my tongue. A lock system like this would really help, and eventually mold my behavior to just stop the negativity all together. It's a shame it's too late for people like me though.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

powerbats

Senior Member

02-21-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by One More Fight View Post
SUXX.
low priority concept in Dota 2 is far better
You do know that Blizzard is putting rules and a Tribunal like system into place to deal with all the trolls and ragers there right?

Also Something I've thought would help but never seems to get anywhere is a self censor option whereby the player can input words into a chat filter that even if they type them they either never come up in game or only on the players own screen.

This allows them to vent all they want all the while letting them play and not disrupt the game for anyone else.

Now as far as the old getting around chat filter, well if they enable this and then type around it then they have no excuse for their ban especially when the filter will cover all the words out there.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

YueienGato

Senior Member

02-21-2013

My question is since this is PBE, how are they going to deploy it and get enough data to reflect live servers?

PBE, if I remember right, started ejecting and temp bamping people who were "non-productive" not too long ago. So who is the test pool? Unless they do some sort of extraodrinary renditioning of flagged players from live onto PBE it seems, I dunno, artifical in a sense?

Also it begs the question that, in his opening, Lyte admits the flaws of the perma bamp model for a f2p game, so does that mean that they are doing away with certain usages of perma bamps?

Bear in mind I do understand this is still in the first of three trial phases, but I am curious as to what the future looks like and what sort of data will appear. I am not convinced that this is the best way of addressing toxic players - as in only a certain segment -, but at this point I am willing to take any new tools that will, literally, remove the teeth from some problematic players.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dzyne

Junior Member

02-21-2013

I'm biased, no doubt, being a permanently banned player, but I honestly feel like a refined system like this could in a way be the equivalent of a 2013 version of the level 20 challenge. Implement the system, lift perma bans (but keep them max tribunal toxicity), and try this?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

BillyTheAttorney

Senior Member

02-21-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzyne View Post
I'm biased, no doubt, being a permanently banned player, but I honestly feel like a refined system like this could in a way be the equivalent of a 2013 version of the level 20 challenge. Implement the system, lift perma bans (but keep them max tribunal toxicity), and try this?
Partial solution. And those permabanned for continual trolling and feeding? Those banned for pre- or post-game screenshots of those who tell people to shoot themselves and die, get cancer, or playing "role or feed" dodge chicken?

I think this experiment will be interesting. A muzzle is a decent solution, but I think only solves half the issues of toxic players.

still half is better than none.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

YueienGato

Senior Member

02-21-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzyne View Post
I'm biased, no doubt, being a permanently banned player, but I honestly feel like a refined system like this could in a way be the equivalent of a 2013 version of the level 20 challenge. Implement the system, lift perma bans (but keep them max tribunal toxicity), and try this?
Playing devil's advocate, if that is a possibly then that is what I think Lyte is trying to move towards (Conditioning people ot think twice about expressing themselves vocally).

The process to that point, though, is still a bit unclear, with some of the doubts I previously expressed on data being the biggest one for me. This is a trial system being unrolled on an exclusive and smaller player pool. The data that Lyte needs under the current system they have for PBE, if I understand it correctly, presents some barriers to . . . realistic(?) environment that yields results that reflect live servers.

Now, I am not a specialist by any means in Lyte's field but I do know one thing: if the raw data does not work out, then the project might be scrapped or thrown back to the design / brainstorming team.


12345 ... 8