: Why don't you admit that those people had plenty of opportunities before to reform? Just like you said, even I have bad days. But how come I never even got chat restricted in my 7 years of playing League. Obviously didn't have any other bans either. The point is, you won't get punished for a slip up, unless your toxicity is absolutely ridiculous. The line has to be drawn somewhere, and after countless experiments where to put it, with different punishment systems, Riot finally decided to put it where it is today. Also you reset, it just takes reaaaally long. Also after all those chances to reform, of course they are extremely strict with their judgement on you FOR MONTHS to come. There are no slip ups allowed anymore at that point. That's not true. Your honor will go down if you're punished... not when you're about to be punished. So it's not a good indicator.
> Why don't you admit that those people had plenty of opportunities before to reform? Just like you said, even I have bad days. But how come I never even got chat restricted in my 7 years of playing League. Obviously didn't have any other bans either. The point is, you won't get punished for a slip up, unless your toxicity is absolutely ridiculous. The line has to be drawn somewhere, and after countless experiments where to put it, with different punishment systems, Riot finally decided to put it where it is today. > I don't know what I wrote to you last time because I don't care enough to look. But I'm pretty sure I admit that they have gotten plenty of opportunities before, you just don't udnerstand what I'm saying. The system is there supposedly to reform, and you get many tries to reform, but if you succeed in reforming after the 2 week bann you're still not reformed in the system. I have never seen or read anything that suggests that you reset your punishments after a very long time, and if that is a reality, it is something the player should be informed of so that they can actually strive to achieve. You will get punished for a slip up if you have already gotten a penalty before. > Also you reset, it just takes reaaaally long. Also after all those chances to reform, of course they are extremely strict with their judgement on you FOR MONTHS to come. There are no slip ups allowed anymore at that point. > We would have to talk about alot more than some months here. I have witnessed myself how long it can go, atleast over half a year. And that is not a realistic time perspective to evaluate if a player is still toxic or not, since in over half a year most players will have slip ups, multible. > That's not true. Your honor will go down if you're punished... not when you're about to be punished. So it's not a good indicator. > If you are still at the mercy of getting banned after one slip up, why would you be able to rank up your honor level? That doesn't make sense. If you're toxic or not reformed you should be lvl 1 in homor or els whats the point.
: No need to. I only do that if I'm referring to something specific of ones statement. Otherwise it's totally sufficient to check under whose comment I've written. It's not that hard.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000800000001000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-15T16:41:07.960+0000) > > No need to. I only do that if I'm referring to something specific of ones statement. > > Otherwise it's totally sufficient to check under whose comment I've written. It's not that hard. No because your comment doesn't make sense unless you quote what exactly you're talking about. Do you think people walk around remembering all these posts? You're reading it then replying a second later so to you it probably makes sense, but to we who don't read our own comments before looking at replies it makes no sense what so ever. So just quote, it's not that hard, you're a big boy.
: Show me that guy. Also show me the text he has written. You don't immediately get banned for two weeks for something that simple. If so then it probably was a mistake and will be fixed.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=0001000000010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-15T16:43:22.831+0000) > > Show me that guy. Also show me the text he has written. > > You don't immediately get banned for two weeks for something that simple. If so then it probably was a mistake and will be fixed. His post is probably still on the player behaviour boards somewhere.
: There is no conflict. Generally you've been warned twice before you actually get permanently banned. If that's not enough then you definitely shouldn't be allowed in this community. Riot won't tell you when your "toxic reputation" has been reset. Nobody said that Honor levels are a reliable source for that. Also you are only at mercy of your own decisions. If you can't manage to control your temper, well... you shouldn't be playing games that involves working with other people.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-15T16:49:12.766+0000) > > There is no conflict. Generally you've been warned twice before you actually get permanently banned. If that's not enough then you definitely shouldn't be allowed in this community. > > Riot won't tell you when your "toxic reputation" has been reset. Nobody said that Honor levels are a reliable source for that. > > Also you are only at mercy of your own decisions. If you can't manage to control your temper, well... you shouldn't be playing games that involves working with other people. Thats just an empty extremist opinion I doubt you belive in yourself. I think you're pretty guilty of it yourself just like most human beings. Thats why they have the "bad day" system in place after all. But what about those who truly are reformed and just "has a bad day" just like everyone els that get a free pass? If you get a 2 week bann and truly reform afetr that you don't even get a reset, you don't ever get the same treatment as someone who didn't have to reform. If riot wants to reform players instead of suppress them, why is there no reform system in place? And riot said that your honor level will be based on penatlies, meaning a player that gets out of level 1 should technically be reformed even though he's still sytematically at lvl 1. So wheres the point in it.
: I don't see your point. I never once said people who feed or troll shouldn't be banned. I simply stated we don't need a permanent chat restriction, because it's useless. Those people will be toxic through other means.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=0008000000000000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-15T16:56:47.704+0000) > > I don't see your point. > > I never once said people who feed or troll shouldn't be banned. I simply stated we don't need a permanent chat restriction, because it's useless. Those people will be toxic through other means. Thats simply not true though because alot of casual verbal toxicity comes from people that want to win, and if frustraded when someone els underperforms. They don't want to lose so why would they suddenly become a part of the problem they're so angry at? That doesn't make sense. We're not talking about people that spam racial slurs out of the blue while playing ad swain.
: It let you write five lines then it had a time limit on each line you could write afterwards. I could have wrote an essay of flame in those if I wanted to. I am still amazed at how you are not getting down-voted. Its a taboo here to go against Riot, speak against feeders/trolls or in favor of flamers. The simple answer is they do not want to deal with feeders/trolls. A bronze4 player with 5 wins and 22 loses, who fed approximately all his games, just made a thread on how players shouldn't be handed out honor levels easily. Just because he is seeing some of toxic players having flares(who probably got those for carrying previous games, and were toxic to him because of his feeding). Don't want to post names, just going to get reported. But if any one is interested going to link his post in a reply.
> It let you write five lines then it had a time limit on each line you could write afterwards. I could have wrote an essay of flame in those if I wanted to. > I know, but with the pings of today we can afford total suppression, allowing no chat activity at all.
: I don't know. Probably to the person I commented on.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=0008000000010000,timestamp=2017-08-15T08:14:26.505+0000) > > I don't know. Probably to the person I commented on. Then you should probably start using the quote function so that people know what you're talking about.
: Again... > They already had permanent chat restrictions. Guess what? Those people were still toxic through other means. Or used the limited amount of words they had per game to almost exclusively be toxic. So people who in the beginnig were "only" verbally toxic also started to grief and harass through other means, when they noticed they couldn't flame the other players anymore.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=00080000000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-15T08:19:07.116+0000) > > Again... > > So people who in the beginnig were "only" verbally toxic also started to grief and harass through other means, when they noticed they couldn't flame the other players anymore. I'm sure some did, and they should be banned, and that is a great opportunity to start being more aggressive with punishing the inters, which is a problem at this moment since so many people go unpunished for a very long time, just like that nunu that went 0/50 every game because he was using scripts to automatically run him down mid. Yea I'm sure someone who just are bad will get caught in a more aggressive banning of inters situation but thats when riot should actally give the opportunity to appeal the bann, then someone can review it because you can't have someone to watch every game that someone feeds. But we already know that they have automatic systems to bann feeders. Theres a youtuber kid dude that god banned not long ago because he was feeding on trynda top simply because he got his ass kicked, but he still took 4 towers alone, an inhibitor, made as much old as the otehr teammates and did fine damage, he was obviously a useful memebr of the team even though he was dying alot, yet riot banned him a few minutes after the game, for sure not enough time to review the game, meaning he was automatically banned for his performance based on reports. If they actually make that system good and take everything into account like damage done, minions killed, damage done to towers and all those things that can determine if a player was a useful member of the team, or someone who wanted to ruin it for his team. I don't see how thats worse that letting 0/53 nunus for 50 games play while banning 5/14 tryndameres that win the game. People a quick to report inters, so with this system I doubt total suppression would be a problem.
: Extremely bad comparison. Being gay is not a choice. Spouting insults and being toxic is. Totally different topics. That's why people who don't stay conscious about what they say need to be reminded of it. Either through honors, or punishment.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000100010000000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-15T08:25:12.877+0000) > > Extremely bad comparison. Being gay is not a choice. Spouting insults and being toxic is. Totally different topics. > > That's why people who don't stay conscious about what they say need to be reminded of it. Either through honors, or punishment. But they're not though. As long as you have gotten a 2 week bann earlier, can be ages ago, you will get banned for the smalled slip up even if you have honor 3. They are not being reminded of it, the honor system just gives a false sense of reformation when in fact you're still at the mercy of saying one thing that can be seen as toxic. Why is it so that a person can be honor 3 and constantly get free keys for good behaviour but still instantly get banned for one game slip up? Shouldn't he be honor 0? See the conflict in it?
: You don't get punished for a simple "fk off". Neither in League, nor in real life.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=00010000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-15T08:27:08.502+0000) > > You don't get punished for a simple "fk off". Neither in League, nor in real life. A guy recently got banned for 2 weeks for saying "fking dumb" in a quote in a joke.
MacDeath (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Woozî,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000e0000,timestamp=2017-08-14T14:43:29.950+0000) > > I don't know how much I belive that, but still, even if that is true, how does that prove that banning verbally toxic people more effective than suppressing them AKA give them a total chat restriction? [I could](https://boards.euw.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behaviour-en/EOfmJgAN-thank-you-riot) search for more if you don't believe me. But I'm around the boards for quite awhile now so I think it might be possible that you trust me. To your other question I'm positive that enough arguments have already been raised in this discussion.
> I could search for more if you don't believe me. But I'm around the boards for quite awhile now so I think it might be possible that you trust me. > The question is not beliving you, but beliving what those people say. > To your other question I'm positive that enough arguments have already been raised in this discussion. > And nobody wants to answer properly because people like the idea of banning and refuse to understand the new circumstances.
: Trying to make a new board post because couldn't come up with any meaningful arguments in the last one? So if you want answers, simply check out your other one.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=a8zEcZ42,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2017-08-14T19:32:58.101+0000) > > Trying to make a new board post because couldn't come up with any meaningful arguments in the last one? So if you want answers, simply check out your other one. I made two because I made the first one in the wrong place.
: > how good your game experience will be depends on those players So you are saying my experience will be better if there are less toxic people. Which gets realised if they keep perma ban the most toxic ones? That's my point exactly and thank you for supporting me in that.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000800000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-14T19:07:40.211+0000) > > So you are saying my experience will be better if there are less toxic people. Which gets realised if they keep perma ban the most toxic ones? That's my point exactly and thank you for supporting me in that. Read the other posts before commenting so that I don't have to repeat myself all the time. Quick answer, No, you're wrong.
: Then don't use them? You only have yourself to blame.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=0001000100000000,timestamp=2017-08-14T19:00:18.621+0000) > > Then don't use them? You only have yourself to blame. Just don't be gay in sharia countries? It's not that easy of a fix, specially not when there can be so much time between the punishments because people usually don't stay concious about their own language policing that long.
: Yes, context matters a lot. For example that you also committed a crime while executing your self rightous vengeance. That's why people who retaliate with toxic speech get punished as well. In League of Legends as well as in real life.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000100000001000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-14T18:50:39.404+0000) > > Yes, context matters a lot. For example that you also committed a crime while executing your self rightous vengeance. > > That's why people who retaliate with toxic speech get punished as well. In League of Legends as well as in real life. I don't know what country you live in that punishes people for saying "fk off" after someone throws racial slurs at them.
: Yeah, surely they do that. Because a toxic game will lure in more people to play it and eventually buy stuff for it. Your logic is flawless.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2017-08-14T11:53:26.215+0000) > > Yeah, surely they do that. Because a toxic game will lure in more people to play it and eventually buy stuff for it. > > Your logic is flawless. Who are you talking to?
: > The proof is all around you, look at otehr peoples experiences. There is no proof at all. What you're showing are highly subjective experiences from a small minority. That's not proof. That's cherry-picking. They already had permanent chat restrictions. Guess what? Those people were still toxic through other means. Or used the limited amount of words they had per game to almost exclusively be toxic.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000800000000000000010000,timestamp=2017-08-14T19:04:03.094+0000) > > There is no proof at all. What you're showing are highly subjective experiences from a small minority. That's not proof. That's cherry-picking. > > They already had permanent chat restrictions. Guess what? Those people were still toxic through other means. Or used the limited amount of words they had per game to almost exclusively be toxic. We're not talking about people inting and trolling AKA being toxic through other means, because they should be banned. We're talking about verbal toxicity. We have more pings now than when Riot tried permanent chat restrictions, meaning we can have total restriction, meaning they can't talk at all. If they then decide to int then just bann them. Anotehr thing they should do is start banning people they belive to be inting much more rapidly, but keeping the system fluid so that people that actually were not inting could appeal the bann with actual results if they were banned wrongfully. You see? If you think alittle it's not difficult to find a solution.
: Court? Really, dude? Alright, if you want to go that way. If someone is unlawful towards you in real life. The damage is already done then. What's the next step then? Going to that person's place an inflicting your own justice upon him? No. You call the authorities, otherwise you'll become a criminal yourself if you take actions into your own hands. Same thing here. You seem someone misbehave. You report him.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=0001000000010000,timestamp=2017-08-14T11:51:12.724+0000) > > Court? Really, dude? > > Alright, if you want to go that way. If someone is unlawful towards you in real life. The damage is already done then. What's the next step then? Going to that person's place an inflicting your own justice upon him? No. You call the authorities, otherwise you'll become a criminal yourself if you take actions into your own hands. > > Same thing here. You seem someone misbehave. You report him. I don't see the point of your comment? Yea if someone does something bad, report them... What we talked about when it comes to court is that context matters alot on the punishment, reports in league value only words and not the context of the words.
Aezander (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Woozî,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000e0000,timestamp=2017-08-14T14:43:29.950+0000) > > I don't know how much I belive that, but still, even if that is true, how does that prove that banning verbally toxic people more effective than suppressing them AKA give them a total chat restriction? Because once upon a season or two ago Riot did just that. There people with 3000+ Chat Restrictions, and Riot had stopped permanbans for a period during that time. The end result? Most of them didn't stop flaming even with the PermaCR.
> [{quoted}](name=Aezander,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000e00000000,timestamp=2017-08-14T15:23:34.409+0000) > > Because once upon a season or two ago Riot did just that. There people with 3000+ Chat Restrictions, and Riot had stopped permanbans for a period during that time. The end result? Most of them didn't stop flaming even with the PermaCR. Thats not total suppression though. Thats normal chat restrictions that let you type 5 things a game or soemthing like that. Now, in season 7, we have tools like the ward ping, meaning we don't need 5 comments a game to play well. Now we can give total suppression, meaning no ability to speak at all. And if someone decides to run it down mid then fine, thats an easy bann, and it's the kind of people riot should focus more on today.
: > [{quoted}](name=Woozî,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000100000001,timestamp=2017-08-14T01:29:49.143+0000) > > "He did, she did" none of that matters. This isn't a kindergarten. > > You know theres a reason for that not being an argument in court, right? > Did a person go into the game to flame? Did the person flame because of casual game mechanics like him losing? Or did the person flame in retaliation to someone els's behaviour against the ToS? These are questions that should matter and would matter in a real life situation for social disturbance for example. ah, true, but having a valid reason for breaking the law does not mean that you will not get punished for it ... ;) For example, if you start a fight in a bar out of the blue, you might get punished with the full penalty (let us say 6 months of prison) but, if you start a fight in a bar, because someone insulted your girlfriend, then you will still be punished, albeit with a less severe penalty because you had an external reason to start the fight, so you might get off with a light penalty of 3 months. NOW, **since you like real life analogies**, next time you get into a bar fight, EVEN IF you had a good reason for it again, the penalty goes up (let us say 4 months), because of your track record. Next fight with a good reason .?. Five months. and the next time you will be treated with six months, just like having started a fight out of the blue ... you see **the law is NOT STUPID** and it understands that if you are constantly in fights, again and again, then chances are that you are quite part of the reason these fights start in the first place ... ;) So, this is what Riot does ... it starts with a warning, a small chat restriction, a small ban, a bigger ban and, after you have proved again and again that you are part of the problem, it kicks you out ... that is what the REAL LIFE LAWS do, that is what any bar does, that is what any reasonable shop owner does, that is what Riot does ... > Not to mention that total suppression of a toxic players ability to type in game is a much better way to reform players, and it's a system that doesn't punish people with chronic reasons to easily flame since then they could still play the game without typing in chat because they wouldn't have the ability to. As I said in a similar topic some minutes ago, Riot tried that and it failed, and all those people with the 3000+ games worth of Chat restrictions, were venting their anger by trolling instead of hitting enter and venting by flamming ... The game has been there, the flammers FAILED to behave accordingly and their - and your chance - is gone now ... all you people want is to protect your bad behaviour and bad characters ... you do not care about reform or the game getting better ... at least have some decency and honesty and do not think that we are that stupid and we cannot see why you care about "those poor permabanned people" ... you care because you are worried that you might join them ...
> ah, true, but having a valid reason for breaking the law does not mean that you will not get punished for it ... ;) > That depends. You won't get punished for breaking a mans arm if he tried to shoot your out of the blue. No matter how many times that happens, you won't get punished. Thats an extreme case though. If you're on the bus 5 times and get verbally flamed with racial slurs and so on every time, and you yell back calling them a racist and a wiener sucker and so on, you won't get punished what so ever. I mean, in reality you probably will because nobody cares about small things like that enough to check the truth of what happend, but riot has chat longs, and they use those chat logs against you when they bann you, so that negates the whole idea of having to belive anyone on what happend, meaning if we had chat logs in real life, something cameras often fix, you wouldn't get punished any of the times on the bus, while the people flaming you could get punished in various ways depending on country. > that is what the REAL LIFE LAWS do, that is what any bar does, that is what any reasonable shop owner does, that is what Riot does ... > No what riot does is they look at who gets reported, they look at what the person that got reported said, then they bann based on that. If you get racially harrassed by an inter 40 minutes before you said that doesn't matter. > As I said in a similar topic some minutes ago, Riot tried that and it failed, and all those people with the 3000+ games worth of Chat restrictions, were venting their anger by trolling instead of hitting enter and venting by flamming ... > "All" isn't realistic, but the people that do so is easy to bann because now they're actully ruining the gameplay. And people that run it down mid already exist and is a much bigger problem even now, so why not focus all that tech people are so proud of on those people. Perhaps that would make Riot care about the toxic people that actually ruin the game and can't be stopped by the easy to use mute button. That makes suppression a Win on stopping verbal toxicity, a Win on making the early lvls of the game less toxic, and a Win on making riot care about the actual problem. > The game has been there, the flammers FAILED to behave accordingly and their - and your chance - is gone now ... all you people want is to protect your bad behaviour and bad characters ... you do not care about reform or the game getting better ... at least have some decency and honesty and do not think that we are that stupid and we cannot see why you care about "those poor permabanned people" ... you care because you are worried that you might join them ... > If we're here to make statements about eachother then let me join. You're just defending the current system because you're vengeful and angry because someone who flamed offended you once. You don't want a system that removes all toxicity because you like to feel like you're getting revenge on someone calling you bad after you make a mistake by reporting them. I'm not here to defend people who are toxic because they want to make the game bad, thats the kind of people that runs it down mid. I want to make it possible to be passionate about the game and want to win without having the ability to be harsh when other people can't perform as you'd like. Thats the only people this system would help, they're not the people that buy a bunch of tears and run it down mid because they want to win and thats why they flame. If anyone does run it down mid because they get a chat restriction then thats easy to see, just bann them. Easy fix, indie games could have this system in cheap.
: This game is neither lottery nor gambling. Neither does it cause addiction mentally stable people. All you provide are extremely wild claims and accusations with no proof at all. The only level toxicity is tried to be kept at is the lowest possible. Riot loses more players and thus money because of toxic players, than they lose through people they perma ban.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=0008000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-14T12:25:35.686+0000) > > This game is neither lottery nor gambling. Neither does it cause addiction mentally stable people. > > All you provide are extremely wild claims and accusations with no proof at all. > > The only level toxicity is tried to be kept at is the lowest possible. Riot loses more players and thus money because of toxic players, than they lose through people they perma ban. The proof is all around you, look at otehr peoples experiences. But yea, if they lose so many people to toxic people and they lose many that get banned, why don't they just fix the problem with permanent chat restrictions? That would fix both of those issues. If all toxic people get permanently chat restricted, they can't flame anyone, and if they get perma restricted instead of permabanned, they won't lose their account meaning the game won't lose a player. Double fix.
: The system is good. You got banned for verbal abuse. That is good. Also you don't get banned for TWO WEEKS just because of one game, unless your toxicity is off limits. Most likely you already had a chat ban in the past, so better look out. Next thing will be a permanent ban.
> [{quoted}](name=twA Divine,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2017-08-14T11:48:44.680+0000) > > The system is good. You got banned for verbal abuse. That is good. > > Also you don't get banned for TWO WEEKS just because of one game, unless your toxicity is off limits. Most likely you already had a chat ban in the past, so better look out. Next thing will be a permanent ban. There is a number of words that can get you banned without any other warning.
MacDeath (EUW)
: >but to fix the actual flaming toxicity theres no way banning will work Not entirely true, I've seen threads about people who actually thanked Riot for getting banned and they were not joking.
> [{quoted}](name=MacDeath,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=OR8aPg5O,comment-id=000e,timestamp=2017-08-14T13:47:52.857+0000) > > Not entirely true, I've seen threads about people who actually thanked Riot for getting banned and they were not joking. I don't know how much I belive that, but still, even if that is true, how does that prove that banning verbally toxic people more effective than suppressing them AKA give them a total chat restriction?
Fajerk (EUW)
: You are looking at the system thinking it's purely binary and just matching keywords. That's not how it actually works. When it comes to verbal toxicity current system is able to understand context and it is keep learning. People think that verbal toxicity is only thing that gets punished, no it's not but system that cares about it is highly advanced compared to other ones. Sure compared to other things, that means almost none get away with verbal toxicity while bunch of people can get away with other kinds, unfortunately not everything has advanced to the same level. And that is not a reason to hold certain parts of the system back, just because they became highly effective. When it comes to cheating it is similar to cat and mouse fight, Riot usually bans for it in waves so cheaters can't tell which cheats are known and which aren't, it's not ideal state but I suppose it will not change any time soon, unless AI becomes able to recognise such things on it's own, which also means it will be able to code it's self. Feeders had easier time to get away with it, but recently Riot has stepped up, even tho there is fair share of false positives to this day (and you don't want to be banned for no reason right?) they now ban people after 1 single game, and permanently if it repeats. Unfortunately it is rather complicated matter as "intentional" is important part. Yes it did not really work for long years but same was true for other systems, it is rapidly improving. Also inability to deal with certain kinds of toxic behaviour is not an excuse to not deal with other, even if it sounds unfair. Now when it comes to your case. Telling people to kill them selves is considered very toxic, it is not and will not be tolerated. Having one game with that is really enough to get punishment to begin with. If you think that telling random people in public to kill them selves is fine then you have very weird manners. And you are saying you stopped playing to "avoid" ban, that is not how it works. It does not matter if you played those games in same week or if you did not play for a year. As said before system is aimed toward reforming, you need to play games without being toxic in order to reduce your punishment level. Current honor system shows it clearly, if you get punished you will get lvl 0, if you don't play at all it will stay that way, and you actually have to quite some time to get back to neutral levels. Regarding that, sure it was not exactly on the eyes, it was communicated but not on the mainstream channels, but there is an argument to be made that they fixed it with the new honor system, which did not really change much in terms of punishments but it allows you to see standing of your account. So I really don't know what are you going for. I get you want to have account unbanned, that will not happen however. If you ask what is worse, 0/50 guy running down mid or guy who says %%% to people, I would answer remove them both, both are creating negative game experience. And as it was said before "suppressing" toxic people was never and will never be the goal, the goal is to have no toxic people at all, that cannot be achieved by suppressing the toxic ones.
> Also inability to deal with certain kinds of toxic behaviour is not an excuse to not deal with other, even if it sounds unfair. > Not asking anyone not to deal with the toxicity, but I still don't see how a total chat restriction is not as effective as a permenent bann when it has the potentional to be far more effective since it's not something that is detrimental to hand out alot. It is literally something that can be handed out after one game that physically makes it impossible for the person to continue. > Now when it comes to your case. Telling people to kill them selves is considered very toxic, it is not and will not be tolerated. Having one game with that is really enough to get punishment to begin with. If you think that telling random people in public to kill them selves is fine then you have very weird manners. > Thats the thing though, telling someone to k,y,s is in no way a serious way to tell someone to kill themselves, it's no more than a meme at this point yet it and other words like "%%%" are treated like the worst kind of hate speech. It's becoming like Club Penguin where you can't have an adult language because the system will instantly remove you for a week or something if you even try to type a negative word. Which in actuallity would be a better way to stop toxicity. You want players to have the freedom of a language filter but you don't want the freedom to actually say those words in the first place, so why not just bann the words making it impossible to even hit enter as long as those words are in your type box. Theres many ways to stop toxicity without relying on players to reform only to remove them completely if they have a slip up years after the reformation. > And you are saying you stopped playing to "avoid" ban, that is not how it works. It does not matter if you played those games in same week or if you did not play for a year. As said before system is aimed toward reforming, you need to play games without being toxic in order to reduce your punishment level. > I didn't stop playing, I just stopped trying to argue with people. > Current honor system shows it clearly, if you get punished you will get lvl 0, if you don't play at all it will stay that way, and you actually have to quite some time to get back to neutral levels. > There is "reformed" people with honor 3 though that get banned based on 1 game just because they got a 2 week bann long before the new honor system even existed. If they actually had lost their honor instead of just getting purged they might feel like the honor system actually matters when it doesn't apparently, because if you say "gay" or "k to the ys" you get booted no matter what your honor is, I've seen it. The honor system is just quite baiting actually when you think of it like that. If a player that had a 2 week bann quite a while ago still had honor 0, he might think more about what he's actually typing because it shows that he's still on his last straw and isn't considred reformed by the system, but since he was able to lvl up his honor fine and constantly get free keys for being nice and so on, it's pretty sound logic to think that he's reformed and therefore is given a new chance meaning he's on the same punishment lvl as everyone els, meaning he might feel he can get away with "having a bad day" like everyone els. Letting everyone start at lvl 2 should have actually made everyone start at lvl 2 instead of just giving people a false sense of reformation. > which did not really change much in terms of punishments but it allows you to see standing of your account. > The standing of your account doesn't matter in terms of punishment though apparently. > So I really don't know what are you going for. I get you want to have account unbanned, that will not happen however. If you ask what is worse, 0/50 guy running down mid or guy who says %%% to people, I would answer remove them both, both are creating negative game experience. > It's easy to say remove them both, but that doesn't change anything. Yea theres not much you can do to reform the person that is intentionally being toxic by constantly insulting and feeding, but the person that is toxic because he wants to win won't exactly get fixed eitehr from getting constantly punishments that don't actually restrict much. yea sure, most players don't say anything bad after the initial "we udnerstand that everyone has bad days" but I'm under the impression that most players get those kind of messages, so saying that the system is super effective at removing toxicity doesn't seem very correct at all because to be toxic you have to be somewhat consistent, right? So how many of the people that actually get to the 2 week bann stops there? The system might be fine tech wise, but in what way wouldn't a total chat restriction be better? We are talking about the people flaming, not trolling. I don't see how all the "bad day" messages, chat restrictions and 2 banns is supposed to be more effective than taking away someones right to speak for maybe half a year. They too have a chance to reform, but if they don't they won't lose everything they're flaming for and nobody will get flamed by them again. It would also for sure clean up the toxic smurf hole that is low lvls. > And as it was said before "suppressing" toxic people was never and will never be the goal, the goal is to have no toxic people at all, that cannot be achieved by suppressing the toxic ones. > Asking for an online competitive game without toxicity is just not realistic though. I don't think it has ever happend before, but suppressing the toxic players gives the same effect as not having any toxic players because there won't be any toxicity in the chat. Sure the inters will still be there, but they're were aware already. People always say that suppression won't fix the problem, but in what way won't it? Is the idea of having toxic people in general play the game what the problem is? And doesn't that bring us back to the vengeful part?
: "He did, she did" none of that matters. This isn't a kindergarten. You broke the rules, so you must face the consequences of your actions. As for the other guy, he probably wasn't even inting, just had a really bad game. Most players just flip out when they look at the score board and decide that the guy must be inting.
> "He did, she did" none of that matters. This isn't a kindergarten. > You know theres a reason for that not being an argument in court, right? Did a person go into the game to flame? Did the person flame because of casual game mechanics like him losing? Or did the person flame in retaliation to someone els's behaviour against the ToS? These are questions that should matter and would matter in a real life situation for social disturbance for example. If a person would not flame without a valid trigger, like the other person flaming him first, the punishment should obviously be milder since the player wouldn't flame without that valid trigger, meaning he's not a toxic player. See what I'm arguing? Not to mention that total suppression of a toxic players ability to type in game is a much better way to reform players, and it's a system that doesn't punish people with chronic reasons to easily flame since then they could still play the game without typing in chat because they wouldn't have the ability to. Inters and so on would still be punished as usual since they're actually ruining the game unlike someone you can just mute to begin with. The vengeful attitude the game has gotten against flame is not healthy at all.
Fajerk (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Woozî,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=a8zEcZ42,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-08-13T22:56:57.865+0000) > > The "last resort" is the 2nd penalty they give out though, and it is based on key words a player typed in game. For toxic verbal behaviour /verbal abuse, passive aggression/ you get chat restriction first and if you repeat it then you get few days ban, only after that you get permaban if you repeat it again. But that is end of the line, before that all you get a warning if you behave bad in single game and get bunch of reports, and also for not being toxic you get honor progression and all kinds of rewards, punishments are merely given after repeated offence. Only exceptions are kinds of homophobia/racial based or extreme verbal attacks in which case several day ban is issues right away. Please not such things are not tolerated in any environment, free speech exist but there are limits, given by rights of other human being. Internet in general or the game chat is no way different from regular public location. >Banning players for having a harsher language is not some good forwardthinking thing, and as I said earlier, it doesn't do anything to fix the problem. As stated it is last resort and or used as warning in extreme cases, mostly to allow "cool-down" and rethink actions. >The current system is good at scaring kids back in line for sure, but thats not really a toxic player and I doubt Riots purpose with the system is to cleanse kids language. That is major part yes. Clearing such behaviour as early as possible is important, since apparently parents can't often supervise their young in online environment is is necessary to make clear rules and enforce them. >Many other games will gladly take away a players right to speak for toxic behaviour because it has an obvious effect, what effect does it have to bann someone for being toxic in the chat, not talking about inters and all that, because I've never heard of anyone saying "Whelp, gotta find a new game to play" after getting banned for being toxic, and if you've played low lvl games you know thats a toxic hell simply because it's full of banned smurfs. Riot tested permanent chat restrictions, the thing is you cannot take chat away at all because team based game requires communication and pings do not cover enough yet and even they can be abused. And truth to be told, as long as you allow people to talk they will be toxic, and simply not allowing to talk them at all has same effect as banning them right away. The goal is not to suppress toxic behaviour, to goal is to reform it. > Also, I don't think it's considered behaviour issues when it's concious. They definitely are. By your logic murders are fine because they know what they are doing. > But all that otehr righteous stuff is all fine and well, just that the problem is still there. I get the whole vengeful cracking down on toxicity and all that, but thats not actually whats happening, because they just come back with no iclination to stop being toxic. If they were instead constantly restricted with being reformed systematically as a reality they'll probably stick to the account that is already built up instead of swapping to new ones, which in turn gives them less space and means to be toxic since they literally can't type because of the restriction, and they likely won't get a new account since they're straight up toxic people that want to win, not trolls that want to ruin the game for their teammates. People you are talking about are most likely never be reformed tbh, and just suppressing them is not good enough. If someone does not value time he gives into multiple account just so he can flame, I'm totally confident to say that person has mental issues and nothing that can be solved without medical attention. There are various toxic people. Sometimes there is just really bad day, such persons usually remain unpunished because it is kind of overlooked by system if it's just one time scenario. Other time there are people who were never thought proper manners or do not even realise their behaviour isn't right. Such people usually realise their mistakes after first ban as they ignore warning before most of the time. Most of these people really do reform, the thing is average person gets pretty scared if he gets banned for 14 days and he played hundreds of hours on that account, people tend to value what they have. Then there are people who are chronically toxic, they do not realise it or realise it but cant help them selves duo to various factors like lack of self control or mental issues (can be just depression or some serious illness) , such people tend to have numbers of permabanned accounts because they can't reform without outside help, unfortunately there is nothing much Riot can do for such people than to keep kicking them out. And there are also other kinds of bans, cheating, feeding. Those are thing punished more heavily because they directly affect competitiveness and core mechanic of the game, but also because normal average person would not really want to result to them ever. Again feeders have more chances than cheaters, as feeding can happen to be just result of certain state of mind in given time frame. _But as I said the point currently is to encourage players to be good, not to punish bad ones._
> That is major part yes. Clearing such behaviour as early as possible is important, since apparently parents can't often supervise their young in online environment is is necessary to make clear rules and enforce them. > I really don't think thats their intention or very fair at all if it was their intention since all community personalities swear time to time, including rioters on their free time playing the game. Saying "%%% me" after a mistake is not exactly restriction-worthy. > They definitely are. By your logic murders are fine because they know what they are doing. > No, by my logic murders are not enherently crazy just because they commited a murder. Most flamers probably don't have psychological issues that cause them to flame at anything in life as in an actual behaviour issue. > People you are talking about are most likely never be reformed tbh, and just suppressing them is not good enough. If someone does not value time he gives into multiple account just so he can flame, I'm totally confident to say that person has mental issues and nothing that can be solved without medical attention. > I don't see how suppressing them isn't good enough. Now it just goes back to the vengeful part I mentioned. Give them 10 attempts at getting reformed, the worst that can happen is that they flame 1 game every 2 weeks for 20 weeks before getting totally suppressed meaning they can't flame at all ever again with perhaps a trial after 2 years or something. That way people with actual issues can play the game aswell as long as they don't int and so on. The verbal part of being toxic does not actually ruin games after all, theres even a mute button, two in fact so that you can still hear their pings if it's a serious game. With the ward ping and so on I don't see how total suppression isn't enough. It's punishment for sure, but it also does something to stop the issue. > There are various toxic people. Sometimes there is just really bad day, such persons usually remain unpunished because it is kind of overlooked by system if it's just one time scenario. Other time there are people who were never thought proper manners or do not even realise their behaviour isn't right. Such people usually realise their mistakes after first ban as they ignore warning before most of the time. Most of these people really do reform, the thing is average person gets pretty scared if he gets banned for 14 days and he played hundreds of hours on that account, people tend to value what they have. > Theres a few flaws in there though, because if you are the kind of person that just went on without realising it's flaming or just didn't think about it, then get a 2 week bann, you can never have a bad day ever again in your league life because then all it takes is one toxic game and you're gone permanently. Or if you were toxic and you truly tried to say the worst thing possible and get banned for two weeks yet reform after that, you can't have a bad day ever again in your league life because then you're out. Being reformed just means that you don't flame anymore, it doesn't mean that the system gives you any goodwill for being a nice guy again. Let's take my case for instance. I wasn't toxic regularily, just in frustration, specially if I was the target of irrational blame for instance, I would be toxic back to people being toxic and I got chat restrictions for it, this was a while ago. I didn't think much of it because I didn't really think I was to blame because I never trolled and so on, but after a chat restriction I think the box that popped up on my screen said that the next punishment would be a 2 week bann, so I stopped for a very long time, half a year or so before I slipped up and got the 2 week bann, que half a year again and I get permabanned with two games as justification with the worst thing said being k to the ys. That shows that there is no "reformed" in the system unless you have to go without a bad day for many years, which is unlikely. > Then there are people who are chronically toxic, they do not realise it or realise it but cant help them selves duo to various factors like lack of self control or mental issues (can be just depression or some serious illness) , such people tend to have numbers of permabanned accounts because they can't reform without outside help, unfortunately there is nothing much Riot can do for such people than to keep kicking them out. > Apart from taking away their right to type in game. That would for sure let them play the game on one consistent account unless they inted. But that would be too easy of a fix or what? I don't get it. > Again feeders have more chances than cheaters, as feeding can happen to be just result of certain state of mind in given time frame. > have you seen the youtube videos of that nunu that used a script to automatically run him down mid every game for hundreds of games? He was literally 0/53 + evey game for so many games. He was cheating and inting. Why did he have so many chances while someone saying "k" to the "ys" only has 2? > But as I said the point currently is to encourage players to be good, not to punish bad ones. > The focus should be to shield the playersbase from the toxic players with suppression that way they can do both. Then there wouldn't be as many report baiters aswell. People that are toxic and trolly in order to get something bad out of otehr players to report them.
Fajerk (EUW)
: Personally I find every other company that ignores toxicity in game or encourages toxic behaviour in certain cases utter thrash. It is the ignorance over the years that led us where we are today, it was never right to be straight negative or in any way abuse other humans, not in home, not at work and not one the internet, yet it was so long ignored that people grown accustomed to this kind of behaviour which can be really be found only in dysfunctional societies, it leads us to the point where in other environments normal behaviour is considered special and abnormal behaviour is perceived as standard. In terms of system it's self, Riot games are leading in the game industry, saying that nobody else does what they do is technically correct because nobody else invested so much into this field of research. What Riot really looks for is to change general perception and improve behaviour of the players, bans are only the last resort. Also if someone has so much behaviour issues that they are racing to get the most bans I can assume they will have health/mental issue.
The "last resort" is the 2nd penalty they give out though, and it is based on key words a player typed in game. Banning players for having a harsher language is not some good forwardthinking thing, and as I said earlier, it doesn't do anything to fix the problem. The current system is good at scaring kids back in line for sure, but thats not really a toxic player and I doubt Riots purpose with the system is to cleanse kids language. Many other games will gladly take away a players right to speak for toxic behaviour because it has an obvious effect, what effect does it have to bann someone for being toxic in the chat, not talking about inters and all that, because I've never heard of anyone saying "Whelp, gotta find a new game to play" after getting banned for being toxic, and if you've played low lvl games you know thats a toxic hell simply because it's full of banned smurfs. Also, I don't think it's considered behaviour issues when it's concious. But all that otehr righteous stuff is all fine and well, just that the problem is still there. I get the whole vengeful cracking down on toxicity and all that, but thats not actually whats happening, because they just come back with no iclination to stop being toxic. If they were instead constantly restricted with being reformed systematically as a reality they'll probably stick to the account that is already built up instead of swapping to new ones, which in turn gives them less space and means to be toxic since they literally can't type because of the restriction, and they likely won't get a new account since they're straight up toxic people that want to win, not trolls that want to ruin the game for their teammates.
RIPCait (EUW)
: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4
If you fail to see logic then thats on you.{{sticker:zombie-brand-facepalm}}
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments

Woozî

Level 30 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion