[League of Legends] - Where we talk about Electric Light Orchestra

1235763

Posts

  • zerg rushzerg rush Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Draygo wrote: »
    I don't quite see your point.

    Are you saying that if someone has hundreds of games inbetween offenses, that makes the games he trolls or uses offensive language somehow less deserving of punishment?

    If i'm sitting on a borderline case, where someone is just being a jerk in chat, but isnt harrassing, trolling, feeding, afking, making racist comments, etc. It makes a difference if I know if this guy is this way every single game he plays, or this is how he behaves in the occiasional bad game, or he perhaps has one or two bad days.

    If they don't put in total games played, or number of games between reports there will be a problem in a long enough run. I'll put it this way, some people with a lot of games have 1000 wins. That's roughly 2000 games.

    Having to go AFK 1% of the time during the game is not unreasonable. Half the time you might return from AFK just in time for the match to end. That's still 10 games where you'll be reported on the tribunal for AFK dodging, and they'll have 10 games in a row to see you go totally afk then come back before the end and you get banned. Compare that to somebody who's got 20 games played, and does it the same thing 10 times. One person deserves to get banned, the other does not.


    On a long enough timeline, everyone would be banned by statistics. People who are borderline just get banned faster. People who are actually trolling get banned fastest of all. Ideally they'd make a way to weed out the first. Seeing 200 games between reports would help do that, while not pardoning people who go 2 games between reports.

    zerg rush on
  • TyrantCowTyrantCow Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    well, the date of the game is displayed

    i think that's a good enough indicator, the number of games played isn't necessary

    from what i've seen, most people do all this shit within a 10 day time span, they should all just get booted.

    TyrantCow on
  • NeadenNeaden Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    zerg rush wrote: »
    Draygo wrote: »
    I don't quite see your point.

    Are you saying that if someone has hundreds of games inbetween offenses, that makes the games he trolls or uses offensive language somehow less deserving of punishment?

    If i'm sitting on a borderline case, where someone is just being a jerk in chat, but isnt harrassing, trolling, feeding, afking, making racist comments, etc. It makes a difference if I know if this guy is this way every single game he plays, or this is how he behaves in the occiasional bad game, or he perhaps has one or two bad days.

    If they don't put in total games played, or number of games between reports there will be a problem in a long enough run. I'll put it this way, some people with a lot of games have 1000 wins. That's roughly 2000 games.

    Having to go AFK 1% of the time during the game is not unreasonable. Half the time you might return from AFK just in time for the match to end. That's still 10 games where you'll be reported on the tribunal for AFK dodging, and they'll have 10 games in a row to see you go totally afk then come back before the end and you get banned. Compare that to somebody who's got 20 games played, and does it the same thing 10 times. One person deserves to get banned, the other does not.


    On a long enough timeline, everyone would be banned by statistics. People who are borderline just get banned faster. People who are actually trolling get banned fastest of all. Ideally they'd make a way to weed out the first. Seeing 200 games between reports would help do that, while not pardoning people who go 2 games between reports.

    This is silly. First off Riot reviews the tribunals decisions and bases punishments off them, they are not just auto banned. Secondly people who are jerks in chat should get temp banned, no matter how their team is doing.

    Neaden on
  • SlicerSlicer Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    TyrantCow wrote: »
    okay, this judging shit is just silly

    these are all so open and shut, they can't just ban the player after 15 games of six to eight people reporting a person?

    i just looked at a guy who averaged 0/25/0 on all the games, reported by at least 6 people each game. there's no reason to even put that shit in the tribunal. just ban his/her ass.

    They've said that people with the most reports are the first to be judged on the tribunal. In theory after awhile we'll get cases that aren't easy to decide.

    In theory.

    Slicer on
  • rakuenCallistorakuenCallisto Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2011
    nealcm wrote: »
    i am taking WAY too much pleasure in this
    I loled @ this.

    rakuenCallisto on
    cbtswoosig.png
  • DraygoDraygo Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Neaden wrote: »
    This is silly. First off Riot reviews the tribunals decisions and bases punishments off them, they are not just auto banned. Secondly people who are jerks in chat should get temp banned, no matter how their team is doing.

    Being a jerk in chat is no reason to punish someone, unless it goes on to actual harrassment. If you were going to ban people for being jerks a good ~80% of the top 100 on the ladder would need to be banned for being jerks to teammates. The higher you are on the ladder your tolerance for obviously bad play will probably be decreased. Calling someone out happens often especially in ranked, and while i dont think its pleasent I dont think its punishable unless it starts breaching the rules.

    I've been minddumping things I would like this system to have or change into this tread over on the lol boards:

    http://www.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=764793

    Draygo on
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Remember, not all Punishments are bans, sometimes the player will only get a warning from the moderators, instead of the ban hammer.

    I've been choosing punish for anything that qualifies as needing a warning for them to knock off that kind of behaviour.

    Gnome-Interruptus on
    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
  • EllthiterenEllthiteren Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Disagree, people who are jerks in chat should be punished. I define "being a jerk" as directing foul (f this, s that, etc) or abusive (you suck, etc) language towards the same player multiple times without provocation (intentional feeding or similar language).

    Ellthiteren on
  • DraygoDraygo Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    You can be a jerk without being foul or overly abusive.

    Some guy calling another guy a noob, making fun of someones build, or calling them bad several times (or even kid) while not the best behavior, I dont think it even qualifies as harrassment. And if were going to punish people for that level of misbehavior even if its just first time second time style warnings its going to chew a huge hole in the community.

    Now if he is ragging someone nonstop in chat for 5 minutes at a time it definatly crossed the line.

    Draygo on
  • Minerva_SCMinerva_SC Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Disagree, people who are jerks in chat should be punished. I define "being a jerk" as directing foul (f this, s that, etc) or abusive (you suck, etc) language towards the same player multiple times without provocation (intentional feeding or similar language).

    I disagree, if someone is being terrible at the game they should be made to feel terrible.

    Minerva_SC on
    "If a cherry pie filled cape is wrong, I don't want to be right.
    I'm dead serious."
  • WhiteSharkWhiteShark Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Minerva_SC wrote: »
    Disagree, people who are jerks in chat should be punished. I define "being a jerk" as directing foul (f this, s that, etc) or abusive (you suck, etc) language towards the same player multiple times without provocation (intentional feeding or similar language).

    I disagree, if someone is being terrible at the game they should be made to feel terrible.

    yes, that will certainly help them improve and whatnot

    WhiteShark on
  • AsiinaAsiina ... WaterlooRegistered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Yeah, I had a guy who was kind of a general asshat, but really he wasn't racist or homophobic or feeding. He just kinda was a jerk to people who were doing badly.

    Asiina on
  • NeadenNeaden Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    WhiteShark wrote: »
    Minerva_SC wrote: »
    Disagree, people who are jerks in chat should be punished. I define "being a jerk" as directing foul (f this, s that, etc) or abusive (you suck, etc) language towards the same player multiple times without provocation (intentional feeding or similar language).

    I disagree, if someone is being terrible at the game they should be made to feel terrible.

    yes, that will certainly help them improve and whatnot
    So one summer when I was at college some friends and I played a lot of volleyball, just for fun. Often times the courts we would go to would be full, or someone else would come when they were full and we would end up playing with random strangers too. This meant that a lot of the time a team might have some players that were really good and some that were really bad and might mess up serves or an easy volley etc. Do you know what never ever happened though? No one ever got upset at them for messing up and called them faggots, or the n word, or just started purposefully not returning serves or anything like that because that is what you would expect from spoiled 3 year olds. If you are playing LoL you should act like an adult, and yes that means not raging at someone just because they are not as good as you want. If someone think that it is ever acceptable then honestly yes, I think the game would be better off without them in it.

    Neaden on
  • DraygoDraygo Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Neaden, your comparison is hardly fair.

    You are comparing playing a sport just for fun, to playing a game to win. The real comparison is when you start getting to the professional levels and you do in fact have people calling you bad. Now in your example if in lol the rager starts slinging racist terms around he will indeed recieve a swift 'punish' click from me. As long as they contain their rage, keep it brief and dont cross the line into personal territory being a jerk is perfectly fine.

    There are a lot more people worthy of punishment than for that guy that fell for some trollbait on his team one too many times.

    Draygo on
  • I needed anime to post.I needed anime to post. boom Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    facetious wrote: »
    How do you access the tribunal by navigating the main site? I can't find the link anywhere. I've resorted to bookmarking the tribunal directly but I have so many bookmarks already!!!

    this is the way to access the tribunal link:

    1. go to the forums
    2. go to the announcements subforum
    3. click on the tribunal is now open by tamat
    4. click on the link to the tribunal


    very intuitive


    Draygo wrote: »
    Neaden, your comparison is hardly fair.

    You are comparing playing a sport just for fun, to playing a game to win. The real comparison is when you start getting to the professional levels and you do in fact have people calling you bad. Now in your example if in lol the rager starts slinging racist terms around he will indeed recieve a swift 'punish' click from me. As long as they contain their rage, keep it brief and dont cross the line into personal territory being a jerk is perfectly fine.

    There are a lot more people worthy of punishment than for that guy that fell for some trollbait on his team one too many times.

    i have literally not come across a case where "containing their rage" was even something i had to consider so

    I needed anime to post. on
    liEt3nH.png
  • NeadenNeaden Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Draygo wrote: »
    Neaden, your comparison is hardly fair.

    You are comparing playing a sport just for fun, to playing a game to win. The real comparison is when you start getting to the professional levels and you do in fact have people calling you bad. Now in your example if in lol the rager starts slinging racist terms around he will indeed recieve a swift 'punish' click from me. As long as they contain their rage, keep it brief and dont cross the line into personal territory being a jerk is perfectly fine.

    There are a lot more people worthy of punishment than for that guy that fell for some trollbait on his team one too many times.

    No, it is entirely fair. None of us play this game at professional levels. If in a tournament a team talks to each other like that it is there business, but that is not what tribunal is about at all.

    Neaden on
  • Minerva_SCMinerva_SC Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    WhiteShark wrote: »
    Minerva_SC wrote: »
    Disagree, people who are jerks in chat should be punished. I define "being a jerk" as directing foul (f this, s that, etc) or abusive (you suck, etc) language towards the same player multiple times without provocation (intentional feeding or similar language).

    I disagree, if someone is being terrible at the game they should be made to feel terrible.

    yes, that will certainly help them improve and whatnot

    I don't care if some random pub improves or not, I just want him to feel like shit for wasting my time.

    Minerva_SC on
    "If a cherry pie filled cape is wrong, I don't want to be right.
    I'm dead serious."
  • WhiteSharkWhiteShark Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    So LoL is a waste of time if you don't win? Grow up, it's a game.

    WhiteShark on
  • WhiteSharkWhiteShark Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Kroque just told me she plays Sona, her secret is out

    she doesn't only play Janna and Zilean !!!

    WhiteShark on
  • TrusTrus Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Going through the Tribunal has just reassured me that this game has the worst community of any game I have ever played.

    I want to ban, literally, every person in each chat log I read; everyone is terrible to each other not just the guy who gets reported.

    Trus on
    qFN53.png
  • Minerva_SCMinerva_SC Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    WhiteShark wrote: »
    So LoL is a waste of time if you don't win? Grow up, it's a game.

    Indeed it is a game! A game I invest time into, and I expect good returns on that time, returns of pleasure. If someone is sabotaging my fun, wether it be a game, life or death situation or otherwise, they should and will know about it!

    Minerva_SC on
    "If a cherry pie filled cape is wrong, I don't want to be right.
    I'm dead serious."
  • UrQuanLord88UrQuanLord88 Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    I hear you Mooman. But if it was a fully automated ban system, people will put the blame on Riot again. Now there is no denying that assholes will get fucked and that they can't really whine about it anymore because the community is 'in charge'. And I put that in quotations because, really, I'm sure not every level 30 person will do tribunal on a regular basis and the system definitely has to be semi-automatic to cover all the assholes in the game


    If you think about it, the only frustration about playing LoL is having 'bad' teammates. Before, there was no way to effectively control that as a player. Now you can go on the tribunal and smite evil doers


    TL;DR Tribunal is part publicity stunt. Make people feel good.

    UrQuanLord88 on
    http://steamcommunity.com/id/urquanlord88
    urquanlord88.png
    Streaming 8PST on weeknights
  • TyrantCowTyrantCow Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Like, I hear you Mooman. But if it was a fully automated ban system, people will put the blame on Riot again. Now there is no denying that assholes will get fucked and that they can't really whine about it anymore because the community is 'in charge'. And I put that in quotations because, really, I'm sure not every level 30 person will do tribunal on a regular basis and the system definitely has to be semi-automatic to cover all the assholes in the game

    eh, the whole thing just reeks of 'look guys, we're actually doing something constructive and productive to deal with this issue'. when, it could all be done quickly and efficiently. i'm pretty sure the results would be the same with a well defined algorithm as it would with the tribunal.

    but, yeah, i guess it is a great way to defer blame.

    and, at the end of the day, it's a fucking business. and if it were my business, i would probably never restrict access to a paying customer. i have a hard time believing any sort of major action will be taken against anyone. the worst i foresee would be a temp ban, give a shithole a week in the box. but, i sure as shit would never outright ban an account. if the person put money in to it, there's a chance they could buy more shit in the future. even if an account hasn't spent any money, they can still use it for advertising purposes; 'over x million people play this shit!'.

    it's quite the fucking pickle.
    TL;DR Tribunal is part publicity stunt. Make people feel good.

    yes, this.

    i mean, i'm sure there will be people out there that feel they now have a method to make the community better or whatever. and, there will be people that just think it's fun/funny. i'm not sure i'm one of those people; but, for the people that do think it's something cool, right on, more power to 'em.

    TyrantCow on
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    WhiteShark wrote: »
    Kroque just told me she plays Sona, her secret is out

    she doesn't only play Janna and Zilean !!!

    I saw kroque playing lux once

    Jars on
  • DaebunzDaebunz Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    got swain. he owns

    first game with him: 11/0/12. after a certain point I seemed more or less unkillable

    went RoA > boots > deathcap > rhylais > about to start QSS before it ended

    Daebunz on
    7yh4xczljsym.png
  • KroqueKroque Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    you fiendish swine!!!!

    Kroque on
  • Fraa JadFraa Jad Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    TyrantCow wrote: »
    and if it were my business, i would probably never restrict access to a paying customer. i have a hard time believing any sort of major action will be taken against anyone. the worst i foresee would be a temp ban, give a shithole a week in the box. but, i sure as shit would never outright ban an account. if the person put money in to it, there's a chance they could buy more shit in the future. even if an account hasn't spent any money, they can still use it for advertising purposes; 'over x million people play this shit!'.

    In the interest of your business you should ban paying customers if they're scaring away multiple other customers. The naked guy shouting racial slurs get kicked out of the supermarket even if he was going to buy something. It seems like the number one reason people don't give games like this a chance is the abusive communities. We may be kind of used to it but there's a lot of people who just aren't going to play a game where they get abuse heaped on them as soon as they slip-up.

    Oh, and there is a Tribunal link on the main page. It's hidden down at the bottom next to "Terms of Use".

    EDIT: Wait, I guess that's just the legal stuff for the Tribunal, never mind.

    Fraa Jad on
  • Feels Good ManFeels Good Man Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    got swain. he owns

    first game with him: 11/0/12. after a certain point I seemed more or less unkillable

    went RoA > boots > deathcap > rhylais > about to start QSS before it ended

    YES


    way better than scrubazar

    Feels Good Man on
  • AsiinaAsiina ... WaterlooRegistered User regular
    edited May 2011
    It's pronounced Malzaterrible.

    Asiina on
  • TyrantCowTyrantCow Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Fraa Jad wrote: »
    TyrantCow wrote: »
    and if it were my business, i would probably never restrict access to a paying customer. i have a hard time believing any sort of major action will be taken against anyone. the worst i foresee would be a temp ban, give a shithole a week in the box. but, i sure as shit would never outright ban an account. if the person put money in to it, there's a chance they could buy more shit in the future. even if an account hasn't spent any money, they can still use it for advertising purposes; 'over x million people play this shit!'.

    In the interest of your business you should ban paying customers if they're scaring away multiple other customers. The naked guy shouting racial slurs get kicked out of the supermarket even if he was going to buy something. It seems like the number one reason people don't give games like this a chance is the abusive communities. We may be kind of used to it but there's a lot of people who just aren't going to play a game where they get abuse heaped on them as soon as they slip-up.

    i get the impression that people don't turn in to raging cunts until someplace in their 20s.

    it's been a long time since i started playing; but, i actually enjoyed the community at first. people were nice and shit. things are different now, people can make as many accounts as they would like, so i'm not sure if the low levels are infested with shitholes or not.

    - also, i would like to think the dickfucks are in the minority. so, i would assume that they're not going to drive away customers. if that holds true, i'll let the fucktwits stick around long enough to get paid.

    TyrantCow on
  • programjunkieprogramjunkie Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Slicer wrote: »
    TyrantCow wrote: »
    okay, this judging shit is just silly

    these are all so open and shut, they can't just ban the player after 15 games of six to eight people reporting a person?

    i just looked at a guy who averaged 0/25/0 on all the games, reported by at least 6 people each game. there's no reason to even put that shit in the tribunal. just ban his/her ass.

    They've said that people with the most reports are the first to be judged on the tribunal. In theory after awhile we'll get cases that aren't easy to decide.

    In theory.

    Out of the 3 people I judged today, not one of them doesn't deserve to be punched in the face and have their computer thrown out their window, let alone a ban from just LOL. Complete trash.

    I somehow imagine a lot of cases will be really easy to judge, because I imagine many just report the worst of the worst.
    TyrantCow wrote: »
    Like, I hear you Mooman. But if it was a fully automated ban system, people will put the blame on Riot again. Now there is no denying that assholes will get fucked and that they can't really whine about it anymore because the community is 'in charge'. And I put that in quotations because, really, I'm sure not every level 30 person will do tribunal on a regular basis and the system definitely has to be semi-automatic to cover all the assholes in the game

    eh, the whole thing just reeks of 'look guys, we're actually doing something constructive and productive to deal with this issue'. when, it could all be done quickly and efficiently. i'm pretty sure the results would be the same with a well defined algorithm as it would with the tribunal.

    but, yeah, i guess it is a great way to defer blame.

    and, at the end of the day, it's a fucking business. and if it were my business, i would probably never restrict access to a paying customer. i have a hard time believing any sort of major action will be taken against anyone. the worst i foresee would be a temp ban, give a shithole a week in the box. but, i sure as shit would never outright ban an account. if the person put money in to it, there's a chance they could buy more shit in the future. even if an account hasn't spent any money, they can still use it for advertising purposes; 'over x million people play this shit!'.

    it's quite the fucking pickle.

    I think that is really bad business, actually. Unless you want to purposely cultivate a cesspool, which isn't necessarily a losing proposition, the bad drives out the good. I'm willing to vote with my wallet against companies that allow bad elements to spread like the cancer they are, and so are others, either on a principled stand, or just simply because it is not fun to play with these sorts of people.

    Besides, for marketing, you can use "X unique accounts created!" or somesuch, which doesn't mean they aren't banned accounts. But really, I think getting rid of the worst 1% is a very safe risk financially speaking.

    I do agree they could probably automate this though. That part you said is completely true. I would but a human reviewer on the other side, but finding intentional feeders is really easy in most cases, especially as a lot of them say, "I am feeding now," or something ridiculous like that.

    programjunkie on
  • TyrantCowTyrantCow Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    TyrantCow on
  • Squidget0Squidget0 Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    They could automate the cases we have now because the cases we have now are the worst of the worst. That is, people with dozens of games where multiple people reported them. It's a trial run, essentially.

    They've said that once they know people aren't actively gaming the system they'll start putting the less obvious cases up on the tribunal, which is where we're going to start seeing borderline cases a computer couldn't handle.

    Also, if someone is raging at their teammates (even just calling them noobs or whatever) in a large number of games I'm clicking punish no questions asked. I don't need that kind of shit when I sit down to play a game, even though I play fairly seriously.

    Squidget0 on
  • Moridin889Moridin889 Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    I love the tribunal. Two different games today I had some goose on ky team just spraying abusive bs. One was a ww who was trying to takes enemy wraiths against mid teemo. Mushroomed and killed. Other was a rumble who got mad at pantheon for not initiating.

    Both times I said Fun fact: the tribunal is up

    Both times they immediately stopped.

    Even if it just serves as a threat or potential deterrent, it'll improve the community.

    Moridin889 on
  • RyadicRyadic Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    In the chat log, someone, other than the player reported, was using the n word. I wanted to punish them both.

    Usually I'll look at the chat log for all games for the player reported, unless I see some type of racist language. That's just something I cannot stand, so it is instant punish for me.

    Ryadic on
    steam_sig.png
  • ElementalorElementalor Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Wierd, I had a tribunal case with no chat log, build or info, just the player reports.

    But all the games had the same complaints; feeding after being down 3 kills, buying zeals to rush down mid after team refused to surrender.

    So it was still a pretty obvious punish for me, but has any else had that problem?

    Elementalor on
    Marvel Future Fight: dElementalor
    FFBE: 898,311,440
    Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/dElementalor
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    I had that happen first case. same thing though I could tell they were guilty with 10 games of 9 people reporting them for feeding

    Jars on
  • Legen DairyLegen Dairy Registered User regular
    edited May 2011

    You guys need to help keep this baby bumped.

    Legen Dairy on
  • AstargothAstargoth regular
    edited May 2011
    Regarding the banning the paying customers thing:

    I think the important part is the realization that a person can be punished. Said punishments do not have to be perma-bans. A 3 day ban will most likely cure the stupid from even the most irritaiting offenders, and if somebody doesn't get a hint from a week-long ban then the community is better of without him. I think the practical result of all of this will result in griefers moving down and creating griefing smurf accounts - which while painful to new players, will make the lvl 30s game experience better.

    Astargoth on
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    are people actually afraid of leblanc mid

    I enjoy killing her and turning the game into a 5v4

    Jars on
Sign In or Register to comment.