PBE: Restricted Chat For Toxic Players

1234567 ... 8
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Qichin

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

Senior Member

02-22-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by YueienGato View Post
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. It seems so simple, but I find it so much more effective than bans based on an arbitrary length of time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exploding Barrel View Post
I'm still not a fan of this idea. I'd rather have toxic players removed from my pool of potential allies than have them remain there but with reduced avenues of communication. I want a team that communicates positively, not one that doesn't communicate.
Except a toxic player doesn't tend to communicate in a meaningful way in the first place. And the suggestion when faced with them? Mute. It's the same result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiister View Post
I think toxic players won't change their behavior, and will wait till their chat is restored fully then go back to throwing raging fits.
Seeing as how the majority of players who get a warning from the tribunal reform, I'd say that something like this could serve a double purpose of being a warning as well as a minor punishment.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Getsuei

Senior Member

02-22-2013

It is always worth a try tbh. It will not fix everyone but if it does help even a small percentage reform it would be worth the every moment invested into it. Just my opinion of course.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

gnfnrf

Senior Member

02-22-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reddhero12 View Post
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.
This isn't a mute.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

lolLuckylol

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

Senior Member

02-22-2013

from my life experience i have noticed this: people never change

-> block theyre chat completely is only way ul get the "toxicitivity" away

gl with this experiment though


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

YueienGato

Senior Member

02-22-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyTheAttorney View Post
OH another point. Dzyne, I'm sorry. I generally don't like crushing optimism or hope, but I'd feel remiss if I didn't point out that - unfortunately, previous permabans probably won't be released. It seems like a procedural nightmare, and something that would completely swamp resources to a pointless extreme.

Let me put it this way. In the field where I work, sometimes the law changes. Sometimes drastically, but those previously convicted of stuff are rarely "reimbursed" if the situation changes.

Say you get caught with weed in your pocket. The judge tells you to pay $150 bucks and do community service. Two years later they make marijuana legal. You can't then go and say "well it's legal now, so I want my $150 back plz"

It works both ways. If they suddenly make something illegal that you've done in the past - they can't then go and arrest you for "things you did in the past."

So, I appreciate the optimism, but it's probably best if you heard to not get your hopes up too high.

Sorry man.
Lyte has answered this.

Quote:
No. We are not making any exceptions on this. Any accounts that were banned in the current system will remain banned.

This is not 'deciding that the old system is ineffective,' we are just iterating and constantly working to improve how we address player behavior in League of Legends--this doesn't remove any of the negative experiences you have created for other players in the past.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PenguinKillBear

Senior Member

02-22-2013

I still do not like this idea.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Comrademig

Senior Member

02-22-2013

As long as this doesn't replace perm bans as the final punishment, I don't see much harm in seeing how it turns out.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Exploding Barrel

Senior Member

02-22-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qichin View Post
Except a toxic player doesn't tend to communicate in a meaningful way in the first place. And the suggestion when faced with them? Mute. It's the same result.
But I don't want to get matched with a player I have to mute either. I want to get matched with four positive, teamwork-oriented players. The only way to get there is to remove the toxic ones, not to keep them around but block their interaction with me.

I realize that's a pipe dream and compromises must be made so I'm being open-minded about the experiment, but this doesn't serve the ultimate best-case scenario. I do also think a punishment that lasts a number of games, instead of a period of time, is brilliant.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kirska

Senior Member

02-22-2013

Willing to give this idea a shot but I will save judgement til I see how they deal with potential abuse of system.

For example "GG" is probably an allowed message, but we all know that "GG" can be both negative and positive, depending on the context.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Exploding Barrel

Senior Member

02-22-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirska View Post
Willing to give this idea a shot but I will save judgement til I see how they deal with potential abuse of system.

For example "GG" is probably an allowed message, but we all know that "GG" can be both negative and positive, depending on the context.
They're getting a certain quantity of messages, not certain allowed message contents, in the current interation going up for test.


1234567 ... 8