Why Riot doesn't do permananent chat bans

A few seasons ago chat restrictions used to **stack** and it didn't solve the problem. It made the problem more wide spread, in the sense that It wasn't uncommon to know someone with 2000+ chat restrictions. People were collecting them like they currently collect mastery points. I managed to find this discussion on **_permanent chat restrictions_** (not bans) from 2014 http://www.surrenderat20.net/2014/05/red-post-collection-lyte-wookiecookie.html The part that is relevant to you: >_WookieCookie, a player support lead and member of the player behavior team, also weighed in on a set of temporary bans that went out on a small subsection of chat redistricted users, replying directly to a summoner who felt that had been unjustly punished:_ >_"On Friday we decided to review the data we collected after placing chat restrictions on accounts with high levels of recorded toxicity. We were pretty pleased with the results, a large majority of players actually showed signs of less harassment and toxic behavior. _ >_Unfortunately a small % of accounts actually increased in recorded levels of poor behavior. For these players we decided to place a 3 Day Suspension on their account._ >_As a lot of you are probably aware, the Tribunal is currently in extended recess while the Player Behavior and Justice dev team works on some upgraded features for it. _ >_During this time we're not going to sit idle while some players try to exploit others in game. Even without the Tribunal we have numerous tools at our disposal to find and take action on high offenders. _ >_In this particular case, we sent e-mails to those affected. I am bee bee sea you might want to check that the e-mail on your account is up to date, as this is the primary way you'll receive messages on the status of your account from us. To help you out here, I decided to take another look at your account. In your case, during the period of chat restrictions your account continued to receive reports in over 40% of the games you played. During your chat restricted period you had a habit of passively aggresively treating your team mates poorly. Either by feeding the enemy, rambo'ing on your own, or just waiting around not contributing until your team surrendered. Even with chat restrictions you did manage to say quite a few terrible things that I wouldn't repeat here. But I'm pretty sure that Lee Sin jungle in one of your games didn't appreciate being called that terrible racial slur just because he wasn't performing well. Everyone has bad games, it's how we deal with them that we excel and grow as players at League of Legends. Calling someone names doesn't help them get better and it certainly doesn't help you win."_ >_He continued: >"The observed behavior of those which were banned was that they used what little chat they had in game to harass and berate others. In other cases they decided to feed or play against their own team in order to "prove a point". But what I find most interesting is that of the players we chat restricted last week (and there were a lot!)we only had to place manual suspensions on less than .05% of the players. By and large, the vast majority of players had no problem adjusting their behavior in game with limited chat."_ in case you missed it: >_**"The observed behavior of those which were banned was that they used what little chat they had in game to harass and berate others. In other cases they decided to feed or play against their own team in order to "prove a point"."**_ Also from [Riot Tantram:](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/wsObUaFj-if-tyler1?comment=00010001000000000000) : >It really breaks down into two categories. >1.) Helping players reform 2.) Shielding others from the behavior, at a cost. >We used to issue chat restrictions that essentially scaled indefinitely. >We were able to determine that after a certain point the penalty no longer helped with reform. The 10-game and 25-game counts for chat restrictions are based on data that they were both light enough, and felt strict enough to encourage people to understand their behavior is unacceptable in game and change it. >We also saw that the players in this 'large restriction' category defaulted to gameplay altering means of harassing their team. It caused an increase in feeding and trolling. >The sample size of this population and time frame is huge. Essentially the time spanning from the introduction of chat restrictions to the introduction of IFS. >So my question for you is, would you rather have more feeders and less negative chat? if you think that removing the chat completely will also "remove the problem", instead of making it worse, you are kidding yourself.
Report as:
Offensive Spam Harassment Incorrect Board