Skip to content
Boards›Discuss the Boards

One of the biggest problems with this board is Gameplay

oOBestEveNAOo··5 votes·2,453 views

It's part of the reason Rioters won't respond on the boards much. It's part of the reason why the board aren't used by players as much.

There needs to be a rank posting requirement.

Every single day low level players and new players flock to that board. What they see are other low level players saying inane and silly things while being rude and unpleasant to just about everyone, but in particular to high level players and experienced players. And usually these low level players are just flat out wrong about everything.

I honestly never thought I'd see a day where I truly agreed with Rackier because that guy can be a tool, but he's right.

The low level player mentality and abuse of any one and everyone on that board while being unable to provide valid or legitimate debate points absolutely kills the credibility of that board and makes it a place of vitriol and negativity that everyone EXCEPT low level players with bad attitudes wants to avoid.

And since for these boards it's the most important subboard that's a major issue.

At the very least we need a diamond only and up gameplay board that one can ONLY post in if one meets the rank requirement. It is impossible as things currently stand to have any kind of productive discussion on that subboard because of the prevailing attitudes (very poor, rude, and insulting ones) of low level players.

When I first started posting to the boards in season one I mostly posted in threads with high level players asking for advice or pieces of knowledge I felt I was missing. I was often told I was being stupid and wrong by players like KirbyCake, LeviathanElite, CaristinnQT, JFK, IreliaCarriesU and the handful of pro streamers that actually posted there at the time.

I didn't take it personal, I didn't respond back with insults and rudeness and a failure to even read or comprehend the responses I was given. I asked more questions and was wrong even more often until eventually all the lessons high level players were teaching me took root and held firm and I quickly became a high level player also.

Those kinds of debates are flat out impossible today as virtually nothing is done to prevent low level players from derailing threads, being abusive and rude, and completely failing to follow a debate or point at all.

This is a primary reason many players no longer post to the boards.

The incompetence and rudeness is a primary reason rioters wont post here as often even when good threads with concise and detailed premises are posted because only one person or maybe two in a 100 page thread is ever even worth responding to and the second that response comes out many low level players will tear the rioter a new one when the rioter wasn't even responding to them in the first place.

The longer this goes on with low level players usurping control of the most important board that is meant for critical and in depth analysis as the basis of rioter interaction the larger the problem grows and the less effective the boards can be. 90% of the posts there daily are inane, ridiculous, pointless, poorly constructed clutter, and insulting to any person who actually knows how to play the game.

We need a Diamond only Gameplay board to have actual and worthwhile discussion related to the gameplay of league of legends. Badly.

106 Comments

HalcyonDweller5 votes

As one of the aforementioned low-rank players who you suggest banning from posting... I have to ask, where do you draw the line between good and bad ideas? How do you decide which topics people can post in and by what ranks? And what about people like me who play a lot of normals, but lack the rank to show their actual experience level?

I do not think that boards users should be forcibly subjected to toxic ranked environment simply for a seat at the table.

Ranked is certainly a measure of skill and knowledge for some, but it does not apply equally to all. There are people who know a great deal about the game who simply do not participate in ranked. And there are players who know a lot about the game, but are unable to implement it either due to deficits in other areas or due to internet issues.

Using rank as the sole measure of a person's validity and worth is a dangerous path and one that would wrongly hinder good ideas from being heard.

Ad hominems have no place in a rational discussion, please do not attempt to ingrain them in the very rules governing who can or cannot share their opinion on the boards.

oOBestEveNAOo2 votes

{quoted}

As one of the aforementioned low-rank players who you suggest banning from posting... I have to ask, where do you draw the line between good and bad ideas? How do you decide which topics people can post in and by what ranks? And what about people like me who play a lot of normals, but lack the rank to show their actual experience level?

I, personally, would like to see ranked subboards for every ranking tier. This will allow all players to post in their tier for specific tier related topics. I would also like a general gameplay board for more general topics that EVERYONE can post in.

The hope with this kind of a change is that Rioters would be more willing to interact on at least the high level boards where discussion will generally be more focused and intelligent and less band wagon haters will hop on them for any little thing they say. The end result might be that more balance decisions are made with the community in mind and our concerns for overall game balance which is most impactful and most important in competitive high level play.

I do not think that boards users should be forcibly subjected to toxic ranked environment simply for a seat at the table.

No one does, but sadly its pretty much the case for all of us. For those of us who are high level players not only did we slog through the toxic ranked in game environment but then we come here to the boards to share our knowledge and we deal with a toxic boards environment too that constantly attacks us simply out of ignorance.

Ranked is certainly a measure of skill and knowledge for some, but it does not apply equally to all. There are people who know a great deal about the game who simply do not participate in ranked. And there are players who know a lot about the game, but are unable to implement it either due to deficits in other areas or due to internet issues.

A fair assessment. In your mind, are the low level players who are extremely knowledgeable the exception or the rule?

Using rank as the sole measure of a person's validity and worth is a dangerous path and one that would wrongly hinder good ideas from being heard.

I want to emphasize that I do NOT want rank to be the sole assessment here as we would be right back where we were in season 4 with all the Rackier drama and the Overlord bs that occurred when high level players finally got so fed up as a group with the antagonistic and rude low level backlash that it created a schism that has never been repaired.

What I want is for people to understand that there is ALWAYS some one out there better than you, more knowledgeable than you, and lashing out against that person just to lash out is unacceptable, particularly when this person is trying to dish out the wisdom they have gained. I am CONSTANTLY asking for advice and tips from those more knowledgeable than myself and rank doesn't actually matter for who I ask. When I moved to maining jungle a few season back and decided to one trick eve I discussed how to jungle and how to play eve with the boards most knowledgeable and experienced eve player DESPITE THIS PERSON RANKING LOWER THAN I DID! And you know what? It worked out great and I achieved my goal of one tricking a new champion to diamond in a new role.

Ad hominems have no place in a rational discussion, please do not attempt to ingrain them in the very rules governing who can or cannot share their opinion on the boards.

Its not about who can and cannot share opinions. I want you all to be able to do so. But to do so RESPECTFULLY. And there is a consistent issue with a specific subset of the community commonly lacking this respect in this endeavor and they are all too often completely ignorant of the fact that they are even being disrespectful and rude while they derail threads and topics and stifle legitimate discussion.

Currently, the group of players governing the rules of who can and cannot post (in a sense as high level players and Riots won't generally CHOOSE to post there because of the negativity and disrespect) are the least knowledgeable and experienced.

I want to have high level players post here again. I want Rioters to post there again. And I would like to have back the group of posters from whom I most often learn new pieces of wisdom myself. As long as the low level player herd of negativity controls who posts and what posts get scene from that board this problem will persist.

The issue is that exactly what you fear is already the case but the worst players are the ones in control of what topics receive attention and this makes the board unappealing to post in when one can simply go to Reddit or something and actually have worthwhile discussion without being ganged up on by incompetent and unqualified players who only want to cause a commotion.

Thanks for such a constructive post mate.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

{quoted}

I, personally, would like to see ranked subboards for every ranking tier. This will allow all players to post in their tier for specific tier related topics. I would also like a general gameplay board for more general topics that EVERYONE can post in.

The hope with this kind of a change is that Rioters would be more willing to interact on at least the high level boards where discussion will generally be more focused and intelligent and less band wagon haters will hop on them for any little thing they say. The end result might be that more balance decisions are made with the community in mind and our concerns for overall game balance which is most impactful and most important in competitive high level play.

Ok I'm with you so far, this sounds like the best of both worlds. I do think it would promote more fair and impactful discussions that Rioters would engage with. It looks to me like you are proposing a more involved reputation system, with a focus on rank as a primary means of determining a player's reputation.

No one does, but sadly its pretty much the case for all of us. For those of us who are high level players not only did we slog through the toxic ranked in game environment but then we come here to the boards to share our knowledge and we deal with a toxic boards environment too that constantly attacks us simply out of ignorance.

I feel your pain, I've attempted to share knowledge that I gleaned from high ranked players and been told to STFU and been ignored.

A fair assessment. In your mind, are the low level players who are extremely knowledgeable the exception or the rule?

Do you mean exception 'to' or 'of' the rule? or did you mean 'or' all along? I'm having trouble understanding the question.

Going to address the idea of exceptions anyways though: I think that perhaps it would be beneficial to have a reputation system, like you are suggesting, but to include other factors in their reputation in addition to ranked. For example, moderators or high reputation users could choose to 'up' another user's reputation if they see that the user's discussions are thoughtful and/or insightful.

Personally I am in favor of a reputation system, I just want it to be made with the caveat of allowing quality posters to climb in reputation in other ways besides just being high rank.

I want to emphasize that I do NOT want rank to be the sole assessment here as we would be right back where we were in season 4 with all the Rackier drama and the Overlord bs that occurred when high level players finally got so fed up as a group with the antagonistic and rude low level backlash that it created a schism that has never been repaired.

I concur, a repeat of such a schism should be avoided in the future!

What I want is for people to understand that there is ALWAYS some one out there better than you, more knowledgeable than you, and lashing out against that person just to lash out is unacceptable, particularly when this person is trying to dish out the wisdom they have gained. I am CONSTANTLY asking for advice and tips from those more knowledgeable than myself and rank doesn't actually matter for who I ask. When I moved to maining jungle a few season back and decided to one trick eve I discussed how to jungle and how to play eve with the boards most knowledgeable and experienced eve player DESPITE THIS PERSON RANKING LOWER THAN I DID! And you know what? It worked out great and I achieved my goal of one tricking a new champion to diamond in a new role.

Its not about who can and cannot share opinions. I want you all to be able to do so. But to do so RESPECTFULLY. And there is a consistent issue with a specific subset of the community commonly lacking this respect in this endeavor and they are all too often completely ignorant of the fact that they are even being disrespectful and rude while they derail threads and topics and stifle legitimate discussion.

Currently, the group of players governing the rules of who can and cannot post (in a sense as high level players and Riots won't generally CHOOSE to post there because of the negativity and disrespect) are the least knowledgeable and experienced.

I want to have high level players post here again. I want Rioters to post there again. And I would like to have back the group of posters from whom I most often learn new pieces of wisdom myself. As long as the low level player herd of negativity controls who posts and what posts get scene from that board this problem will persist.

The issue is that exactly what you fear is already the case but the worst players are the ones in control of what topics receive attention and this makes the board unappealing to post in when one can simply go to Reddit or something and actually have worthwhile discussion without being ganged up on by incompetent and unqualified players who only want to cause a commotion.

Ok that was a lot of info, I think I've managed to understand it and I am fairly certain I effectively expressed my agreement and interest in the ideas in my responses above, so I won't waste your time by re-iterating my words in lengthy statements just for the sake of replying to every part of your comment.

Thanks for such a constructive post mate.

Thanks for engaging with it and being constructive yourself :) Overall I like this idea and I think it has potential, I just don't want to see it done in a way that excludes the people who demonstrate thoughtfulness, insight, or good understanding of the game.

redniwediS2 votes

Do you mean exception 'to' or 'of' the rule? or did you mean 'or' all along? I'm having trouble understanding the question.

It's a turn of phrase, where the rule refers to the majority of the group and the exception refers to the minority. In this case he is asking if you feel the knowledgeable low ranked players are the minority or the majority.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

{quoted}

Going to address the idea of exceptions anyways though: I think that perhaps it would be beneficial to have a reputation system, like you are suggesting, but to include other factors in their reputation in addition to ranked. For example, moderators or high reputation users could choose to 'up' another user's reputation if they see that the user's discussions are thoughtful and/or insightful.

Personally I am in favor of a reputation system, I just want it to be made with the caveat of allowing quality posters to climb in reputation in other ways besides just being high rank.

This is actually, legitimately, the best idea I have ever heard for the boards in my entire life.

Good god it was so simple... This is exemplary work mate! It's perfect! A system like this could easily identify players who consistently post with the intent to disseminate wisdom and an easily identifiable marker would make them less likely to be attacked and antagonized.

What sort of criteria do you have in mind for a Reputation system like this? Do views, upvotes, total posts, duration of posting history and frequency of posts matter in addition to in game qualifications? What about counting Rioter responses to such a party as this, I feel, would be a good indicator of quality discussion?

HalcyonDweller1 votes

{quoted}

This is actually, legitimately, the best idea I have ever heard for the boards in my entire life.

Good god it was so simple... This is exemplary work mate! It's perfect!

Haha thanks dude, that was almost so enthusiastic that it seemed sarcastic. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt though and I'm inclined to think you are just very excited.

A system like this could easily identify players who consistently post with the intent to disseminate wisdom and an easily identifiable marker would make them less likely to be attacked and antagonized.

What sort of criteria do you have in mind for a Reputation system like this? Do views, upvotes, total posts, duration of posting history and frequency of posts matter in addition to in game qualifications? What about counting Rioter responses to such a party as this, I feel, would be a good indicator of quality discussion?

I would imagine that duration of posting history, upvotes (although this would require safeguards against upvote farming), perhaps punishment history, and total post count, would all factor into it.

Additionally, # of games played, both in normal and ranked, as well as diversity of champions mastered and other things that can be measured from a player's match history should also probably be used as factors. Also, as you stated in your post, actual rank should factor into it - because players who climb in ranked definitely have demonstrated that they have done something right to be able to do that.

There should be a separate form of voting (or some kind of method of upping reputation that is separate or functions differently from the current voting system), one for moderators or higher reputation users that would allow them to increase a post's status or visibility, in addition to making it count more than usual towards the poster's own reputation, thus feeding into making their future posts carry more weight.

There should also be systems in place for users to lose status. If someone shitposts or bullies others then they should have that reflected in their profile and their posts and votes should carry less weight.

This is all just speculation though. What do you think would be the best factors or methods to use?

ModThe Djinn3 votes

{quoted}Additionally, # of games played, both in normal and ranked, as well as diversity of champions mastered and other things that can be measured from a player's match history should also probably be used as factors. Also, as you stated in your post, actual rank should factor into it - because players who climb in ranked definitely have demonstrated that they have done something right to be able to do that.

There should be a separate form of voting (or some kind of method of upping reputation that is separate or functions differently from the current voting system), one for moderators or higher reputation users that would allow them to increase a post's status or visibility, in addition to making it count more than usual towards the poster's own reputation, thus feeding into making their future posts carry more weight.

There should also be systems in place for users to lose status. If someone shitposts or bullies others then they should have that reflected in their profile and their posts and votes should carry less weight.

This is all just speculation though. What do you think would be the best factors or methods to use?

This is an interesting idea, but I ultimately feel like it would actually create more of an echo chamber, because suddenly only the opinions of "high reputation" posters get visibility, and anyone new to the boards fights an uphill battle to get noticed.

It's also probably either A: exploitable, B: time-consuming for moderators, or C: inefficiently based if it uses games played and rank which are, again, not really the greatest indicators of ability to contribute to a conversation.

I will say we've been looking into ways to highlight especially helpful community members and improve community interaction, but I don't think this particular method of generating a reputation score is especially appealing to me.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=000600000000000100000000,timestamp=2017-12-06T20:45:46.185+0000)

This is an interesting idea, but I ultimately feel like it would actually create more of an echo chamber, because suddenly only the opinions of "high reputation" posters get visibility, and anyone new to the boards fights an uphill battle to get noticed.

That's always been true though, and always will be in any community setting. New members must prove their value to the community in order to be considered highly valuable. They EARN their merit.

It's also probably either A: exploitable, B: time-consuming for moderators, or C: inefficiently based if it uses games played and rank which are, again, not really the greatest indicators of ability to contribute to a conversation.

Exploitable probably not. Time consuming? Oh yeah. Definitely.

As for C, well, it should take into account rank and games played, but that should only be a portion (and not the greatest portion imho) of what is considered. I think the most important consideration should be given to the posting contributions since that is what this board is about.

In a sense we already have some of that with the volunteer program.

You folks are all posters I felt contributed in many various ways to the boards in an attempt to make this a more engaging and enjoyable place as well as a place where more information can be disseminated. It's why I fought so hard for several years to have the program implemented and its why I fought so hard for so many of you folks that currently serve to be the ones in position to provide this service.

And again, this is based on the merit of your contributions over a length of time that proved your value to the community at large.

I will say we've been looking into ways to highlight especially helpful community members and improve community interaction, but I don't think this particular method of generating a reputation score is especially appealing to me.

Well, we can work on it then and maybe make it a more sound concept. Right now its existed as a proposal for all of an hour... It's not likely to take on a very effective form yet.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}That's always been true though, and always will be in any community setting. New members must prove their value to the community in order to be considered highly valuable. They EARN their merit.

While true, earning merit is easier when there isn't an obvious indicator of "this thread is worth reading due to who posted it." I dislike that as a core feature of the boards.

Exploitable probably not. Time consuming? Oh yeah. Definitely.

To be blunt here -- the moderators are volunteers. If it's a time-consuming process to adjust individual's reputation scores, it's unlikely to happen. And if it's NOT moderator based but rather community based, than it will end up about as exploitable as the upvote/downvote system -- and someone dedicated to messing with that can, as downvote spam shows.

In a sense we already have some of that with the volunteer program.

You folks are all posters I felt contributed in many various ways to the boards in an attempt to make this a more engaging and enjoyable place as well as a place where more information can be disseminated. It's why I fought so hard for several years to have the program implemented and its why I fought so hard for so many of you folks that currently serve to be the ones in position to provide this service.

And again, this is based on the merit of your contributions over a length of time that proved your value to the community at large.

You might be interested to know than that we're looking into ways to recognize community members with valuable contributions, although I don't have any specifics to share at this moment. I'm pretty confident that a reputation system is outside development scope though.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=00060000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2017-12-06T21:03:24.087+0000)

While true, earning merit is easier when there isn't an obvious indicator of "this thread is worth reading due to who posted it." I dislike that as a core feature of the boards.

I actually kind of like it as a feature, so we might not be able to disagree here. Granted I already do gravitate toward posts and threads made by particular posters who have a known quality for the contributions as these are often the most insightful and interesting posts on the boards.

I will always read a HateDaddy, Malicious Metal, or SonaxRubbick (among several others) gameplay thread. Always, without exception. These posters have proven they offer unique and valuable insight more often than not and typically I can gain more from reading their thoughts on a matter than most other posters.

To be blunt here -- the moderators are volunteers. If it's a time-consuming process to adjust individual's reputation scores, it's unlikely to happen. And if it's NOT moderator based but rather community based, than it will end up about as exploitable as the upvote/downvote system -- and someone dedicated to messing with that can, as downvote spam shows.

Understandable on both the volunteers part and the vote spamming issue (which I think we can agree is still a problem as it has always been).

You might be interested to know than that we're looking into ways to recognize community members with valuable contributions, although I don't have any specifics to share at this moment. I'm pretty confident that a reputation system is outside development scope though.

I am indeed interested!

And if a rep system is outside the scope at the moment that's fine.

Volunteers were outside the scope of development for years while we discussed how, why, when and what exactly to implement and why this would be a superior system. We eventually made the headway required to put it in place and I do think it's been quite beneficial.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}I will always read a HateDaddy, Malicious Metal, or SonaxRubbick (among several others) gameplay thread. Always, without exception. These posters have proven they offer unique and valuable insight more often than not and typically I can gain more from reading their thoughts on a matter than most other posters.

See, I think that's fine earned merit. The issue I have is that with a system like the reputation suggestion is that, when it's visible, someone may immediately discount a worthwhile post (even without reading it) because the user doesn't have the right flair or reputation. I want you (and others) to find the next Great Poster X, not be encouraged to skip over them because they're new and don't have the flair needed to get recognition on their thread.

redniwediS1 votes

What about something similar to the post-game honor system, where people can choose to mark posts as "helpful" or "knowledgeable" alongside the regular up/down vote system? If they have a high enough rating a poster could get a little icon on here like they already do for end of season rank. It's not perfect, but it would be easily recognizable by people who play the game.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}

What about something similar to the post-game honor system, where people can choose to mark posts as "helpful" or "knowledgeable" alongside the regular up/down vote system? If they have a high enough rating a poster could get a little icon on here like they already do for end of season rank. It's not perfect, but it would be easily recognizable by people who play the game.

We've had some discussions along those lines but, frankly, our ability to do boards development on that scale is somewhat limited. It's not quite as easy a feature as the minor enhancements we've rolled out recently.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=000600000000000100000000,timestamp=2017-12-06T20:45:46.185+0000)

This is an interesting idea, but I ultimately feel like it would actually create more of an echo chamber, because suddenly only the opinions of "high reputation" posters get visibility, and anyone new to the boards fights an uphill battle to get noticed.

It's also probably either A: exploitable, B: time-consuming for moderators, or C: inefficiently based if it uses games played and rank which are, again, not really the greatest indicators of ability to contribute to a conversation.

Ah okay then, thanks for taking the time to read through my ideas and respond to them!

Would it help at all to reduce the echo-chamber-ness if high reputation users were somehow required to participate in others' discussions and vote on things not their own in order to maintain their own reputation? I'm imagining reputation as something that would be somewhat volatile and not so steady that it could ingrain high status users above others or prevent newer users from gaining a foothold in the playing field.

Or if you feel that the idea is unworkable, are you able / willing to discuss any ideas you are entertaining that might do it better?

I will say we've been looking into ways to highlight especially helpful community members and improve community interaction, but I don't think this particular method of generating a reputation score is especially appealing to me.

I would love to be a part of these discussions, do you know if I could get a seat at that table? Improving the ways by which the community and Riot can come together to exchange ideas or address concerns is one of my highest aspirations for the boards.

ModThe Djinn3 votes

{quoted}Would it help at all to reduce the echo-chamber-ness if high reputation users were somehow required to participate in others' discussions and vote on things not their own in order to maintain their own reputation? I'm imagining reputation as something that would be somewhat volatile and not so steady that it could ingrain high status users above others or prevent newer users from gaining a foothold in the playing field.

That would feel rather forced, and also make the system even more complex -- and part of the issue is development for such a feature, which is currently unsupported.

Or if you feel that the idea is unworkable, are you able / willing to discuss any ideas you are entertaining that might do it better?

At the moment I don't have any specifics, no, other than to say that we're tossing around some vague ideas.

I would love to be a part of these discussions, do you know if I could get a seat at that table? Improving the ways by which the community and Riot can come together to exchange ideas or address concerns is one of my highest aspirations for the boards.

If you want to make a thread about highlighting community engagement or community behavior, by all means do so, and I'm sure we'll participate. Otherwise, you can always come onto the Discuss the Boards to have a one-on-one (or on multiple, if we're around) chat with us to share thoughts/ideas.

Alternatively, you can apply to join the Volunteer Team, as we have applications up currently.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

{quoted}

Haha thanks dude, that was almost so enthusiastic that it seemed sarcastic. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt though and I'm inclined to think you are just very excited.

I would imagine that duration of posting history, upvotes (although this would require safeguards against upvote farming), perhaps punishment history, and total post count, would all factor into it.

Additionally, # of games played, both in normal and ranked, as well as diversity of champions mastered and other things that can be measured from a player's match history should also probably be used as factors. Also, as you stated in your post, actual rank should factor into it - because players who climb in ranked definitely have demonstrated that they have done something right to be able to do that.

There should be a separate form of voting (or some kind of method of upping reputation that is separate or functions differently from the current voting system), one for moderators or higher reputation users that would allow them to increase a post's status or visibility, in addition to making it count more than usual towards the poster's own reputation, thus feeding into making their future posts carry more weight.

There should also be systems in place for users to lose status. If someone shitposts or bullies others then they should have that reflected in their profile and their posts and votes should carry less weight.

This is all just speculation though. What do you think would be the best factors or methods to use?

I really like that you included champion pool diversity. I wouldn't have thought of that and it's certainly a factor that should be considered.

As far as upvote farming, well, that would be a thing. And I actually can't think of a way around that one at the moment. It'll take some more in depth thought, so I'll have to get back to you on that one. My thinking at the moment is to just assign this a lower weight value than things like comments or views or Rioter responses.

HalcyonDweller2 votes

Thanks, it is reassuring to know you like my ideas.

It might be possible to reduce upvote farming by making votes count more or less depending on who votes. But as The Djinn said in response to me, that complicates things.

I know that I want something to happen, and I've got ideas for ways to do it, but we do have to take into consideration that everyone working on the boards is volunteers. Riot doesn't pay them for their work, although I think they damn well should considering all they go through to try to manage the boards and develop new features for us.

We need a way to automate or simplify it, something to reduce the burden on the volunteers while effectively preventing exploits such as upvote farming.

ModThe Djinn5 votes

Hey guys.

There's a lot of antagonistic posting in this thread. This is the friendly warning to knock that sort of behavior off. We can have discussions without accusing each other of lacking knowledge, being antagonistic, etc.

To address the point in the original post -- I can't see us making a rank-exclusive board. There are a few reasons for this, in my mind.

  1. While there is a correlation between rank and game knowledge, it is not actually a reliable indicator of whether or not a player truly knows the game. There are some great players who get to the top ranks through mastery of a single thing, and some great players who know and understand the game, but just don't care enough to do ranked. Both these players (and more) have a right to contribute to discussions.
  2. Riot is interested in feedback from EVERYONE, not just those at the top. We're all part of the League community, and our opinions matter.
  3. It furthers the elitism that rank already brings to the conversation, and that's not something we really want to emphasize too much.
  4. Skill at the game does NOT directly correlate to design knowledge or design ability, and often design conversations are an important part of gameplay discussions.
  5. High-skilled players are able to be rude and impolite as well, and I've seen no correlation between rank and good behavior in a discussion.
redniwediS3 votes

Guess things did get a little out of hand. Thanks for the friendly warning rather than outright closing the thread, there is definitely a worth while discussion that can come from this.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2017-12-06T20:03:49.235+0000)

  1. High-skilled players are able to be rude and impolite as well, and I've seen no correlation between rank and good behavior in a discussion.

This is the most important part for me to respond to as I believe it is quite true.

And it was a huge part of my problem with the boards in season 4 when the Overlord drama first started.

But the fact remains that in the end, the largest portion of the playerbase is the portion most commonly posting in that subboard and they typically post in a fashion that actually defies the rules of that subboard cluttering up the boards with useless negativity, and most often its centered around rank.

What is a high level player left with when no other valid point of debate has any impact than to play the rank card?

I find it quite annoying that quality discussions are impossible to have for the most part because of (mostly) a handful of players who don't have the knowledge or experience to discuss a topic failing to discuss it and resorting to the tired old argument of "well your rank doesn't mean anything, you're an idiot" that is such bs to get on a daily basis.

It discourages the community in general from interacting as a community and discourages experienced and knowledgeable individuals from wanting to assist those asking for assistance when that is the most common response given to us.

Having to battle the mindless downvote herd of incompetence is why many of the posters who provided such insight will no longer post at all.

ModThe Djinn3 votes

{quoted}This is the most important part for me to respond to as I believe it is quite true.

From the angle of someone who sees and handles behavior on the boards, I have not personally seen any meaningful correlation, save that instances of rank-shaming are higher from higher ranked players. Ultimately, everyone's opinion matters, whether they're in bronze or challenger. They don't HAVE to listen or agree with someone higher ranked than they are, and they are allowed to voice their frustration or irritation provided they abide by the Universal Rules while they do so.

I find it quite annoying that quality discussions are impossible to have for the most part because of (mostly) a handful of players who don't have the knowledge or experience to discuss a topic failing to discuss it and resorting to the tired old argument of "well your rank doesn't mean anything, you're an idiot" that is such bs to get on a daily basis.

That's an issue with how certain players interact with the boards, but it is NOT limited to low-ranked players, nor is it even especially more COMMON in low-ranked players in terms of percentage of the whole -- just there are more of them than there are diamond players.

Rank does mean things in discussions, yes -- it means that, when discussing play at a certain level of skill, you have experience there. That's pretty much all it boils down to though. Rank alone doesn't magically bring greater insight, greater game knowledge, greater design ability, or greater ability to have meaningful discussions. I don't want (and am sure the team doesn't want) to simply assume that someone is less able to contribute to a discussion on the experience of playing League just because they're not Diamond+.

I agree there's a problem with how many users use the boards, but I don't think rank is the solution.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=000700010000,timestamp=2017-12-06T20:25:54.043+0000)

From the angle of someone who sees and handles behavior on the boards, I have not personally seen any meaningful correlation, save that instances of rank-shaming are higher from higher ranked players. Ultimately, everyone's opinion matters, whether they're in bronze or challenger. They don't HAVE to listen or agree with someone higher ranked than they are, and they are allowed to voice their frustration or irritation provided they abide by the Universal Rules while they do so.

That's an issue with how certain players interact with the boards, but it is NOT limited to low-ranked players, nor is it even especially more COMMON in low-ranked players in terms of percentage of the whole -- just there are more of them than there are diamond players.

Fair assessment.

Rank does mean things in discussions, yes -- it means that, when discussing play at a certain level of skill, you have experience there. That's pretty much all it boils down to though. Rank alone doesn't magically bring greater insight, greater game knowledge, greater design ability, or greater ability to have meaningful discussions. I don't want (and am sure the team doesn't want) to simply assume that someone is less able to contribute to a discussion on the experience of playing League just because they're not Diamond+.

See, now that I don't understand and never will. A licensed and practicing surgeon of 20 years is, by definition, more knowledgeable in that arena than a 1st year resident...

This does not necessarily mean that they don't have overlapping areas of expertise, but the 20 year surgeon who has made a career of it is simply going to know more because they have SEEN more.

I agree there's a problem with how many users use the boards, but I don't think rank is the solution.

It's not rank that is a solution. It's the fact that the overwhelming majority make it a problem. And lets be clear here, I'm not really discussing rank per se. I'm really discussing knowledge and experience and how inexperienced players interact with the experienced players (often in an extremely rude fashion without even realizing they are being rude and violating board rules that are very lax in terms of enforcement) in a regularly negative fashion that causes a negative environment for everyone.

When I say that Riot's classification system for champions is wonky and confusing and what a champion's role is can be simply summed up by the style of kit they have and the argument in return is "Nah uh, Riot said differently so you must be wrong"... I mean...

Or when a player says "Ornn is garbage right now, I'm an Ornn player" and is serious despite the fact Ornn is super strong in competitive play atm and is being nerfed because he's super strong...

Like...

These aren't even arguments or debate points. Its just people plugging their ears and going "NYANYANYANYANYANYA I CANT HEAR YOU!!!!"

More over its insulting to me as a poster to have to deal with the repetition of these types of arguments (almost universally from low level players, but on occasion a diamond or two, sure) when they aren't valid, never were valid, and never will be valid and it feels like bashing my head against a brick wall. A feeling Rioters can relate to. And posters of the past like Hashinshin and KirbyCake. The most knowledgeable and experienced portion of the playerbase with the most wisdom to share are regularly encouraged to stop wasting time posting with people who ask for help and then insult the person doing the helping and the ultimate victim in all this are the players who TRULY want to gain some sort of insight as the players who could provide it don't want to out of fear for being attacked from all angles as that is generally what happens.

ModThe Djinn4 votes

{quoted}See, now that I don't understand and never will. A licensed and practicing surgeon of 20 years is, by definition, more knowledgeable in that arena than a 1st year resident...

This does not necessarily mean that they don't have overlapping areas of expertise, but the 20 year surgeon who has made a career of it is simply going to know more because they have SEEN more.

Right. But that metaphor falls apart, because League isn't surgery.

Let's say I'm an amazing Split-Push Singed player. I'm Diamond 1. I one-trick Singed. I know everything about Singed.

Am I qualified to discuss the intricacies of bot-lane balance? Not really. Am I an expert on the minutia surrounding the support-gold-income game? Nope. I'm just a damn good Singed player. Frankly, someone is likely better off getting Caitlyn advice or discussing Sona laning phase balance with a Silver II player who plays a lot of bot lane and has good discussion abilities.

Or take someone who regularly follows pro play, studies game design, and is very skilled at communicating their knowledge. Sure, they might not be the best person to decide if Alistar needs 5 damage off his Q or 10 damage off his Q, but that guy is GREAT to talk to about metagame states, what an ability adjustment might do to a champion's playstyle, the risk/reward of buffing a reliable spell vs. a circumstantial one, and so one. Even if he's Bronze IV, he can likely bring more to that discussion than a Diamond 1 player who really doesn't know much about the situation in question.

See, in League you can be the world's best heart surgeon, but the PROBLEMS are the whole body. Just because you're a good heart surgeon doesn't mean your input on, say, neurosurgery is any more valuable than the 1st year neurosurgeon. In fact, while you might be better with the minutia of the actual surgery itself, he might well floor you with points you've never even considered, as, despite your skill, he may know things you don't.

...how inexperienced players interact with the experienced players (often in an extremely rude fashion without even realizing they are being rude and violating board rules that are very lax in terms of enforcement) in a regularly negative fashion that causes a negative environment for everyone.

This absolutely goes both ways, as evidenced by this very thread before I stepped in. The solution, from a moderation perspective, is NOT to simply isolate individuals -- we all, as a community, simply need to learn to have better discourse.

When I say that Riot's classification system for champions is wonky and confusing and what a champion's role is can be simply summed up by the style of kit they have and the argument in return is "Nah uh, Riot said differently so you must be wrong"... I mean...

Or when a player says "Ornn is garbage right now, I'm an Ornn player" and is serious despite the fact Ornn is super strong in competitive play atm and is being nerfed because he's super strong...

These aren't even arguments or debate points. Its just people plugging their ears and going "NYANYANYANYANYANYA I CANT HEAR YOU!!!!"

You're likely not rephrasing the conversation correctly. The second point likely means that Ornn is garbage FOR THEM or for THEIR TEAM. Instead of saying "That's not true" and getting into an argument about that, a better method would be to talk about some of Ornn's strengths and how to best use them when playing with/as Ornn. Ultimately, some players just don't want to listen, and those conversations you should bow out of...and yes, those players exist at all levels of skill.

The first one is also totally a debate point. I'd PERSONALLY agree with you, but many wouldn't, and they're not inherently incorrect to do so. Roles DO say something about the style of a kit to many people, even if it's not really meaningful in your eyes or my eyes.

More over its insulting to me as a poster to have to deal with the repetition of these types of arguments (almost universally from low level players, but on occasion a diamond or two, sure) when they aren't valid, never were valid, and never will be valid and it feels like bashing my head against a brick wall.

Then don't. You're free to engage or not engage as you see fit, and, in all threads, you can choose only to respond to individuals who you feel are providing meaningful discussion in your eyes. If you and others agree those comments will end up upvoted, and take greater prominence in the thread. THAT is how we create change -- by leading by example, and not putting others down. Show -- by example, not by words -- the sort of behavior you want, and don't make it based on rank or experience, but rather on ability to have a conversation...and yes, that means even if someone disagrees with you, doesn't respect your experiences, or refuses to listen. Neither side needs to "win" to have a meaningful discussion worth having on the boards.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=00070001000000000000,timestamp=2017-12-06T20:58:28.289+0000)

Or take someone who regularly follows pro play, studies game design, and is very skilled at communicating their knowledge. Sure, they might not be the best person to decide if Alistar needs 5 damage off his Q or 10 damage off his Q, but that guy is GREAT to talk to about metagame states, what an ability adjustment might do to a champion's playstyle, the risk/reward of buffing a reliable spell vs. a circumstantial one, and so one. Even if he's Bronze IV, he can likely bring more to that discussion than a Diamond 1 player who really doesn't know much about the situation in question.

Me. To a "T". I have NO idea if 5 or 10 would be the right call but I can damn well tell ya what the effects of changing his combo to a buffered ability will have and what it means in mostly any phase of the game.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}

Me. To a "T". I have NO idea if 5 or 10 would be the right call but I can damn well tell ya what the effects of changing his combo to a buffered ability will have and what it means in mostly any phase of the game.

Right, but that's also me, and I'm Silver last season, partly because I don't care about ranked and wanted to instead have a bit of fun playing ranked with my friends of various skill levels. This is why rank being heavily weighed in a discussion about input value on Gameplay topics can be problematic. :P

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=0007000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-12-06T21:15:36.700+0000)

Right, but that's also me, and I'm Silver last season, partly because I don't care about ranked and wanted to instead have a bit of fun playing ranked with my friends of various skill levels. This is why rank being heavily weighed in a discussion about input value on Gameplay topics can be problematic. :P

Agreed, which is why I want it to be a portion of the weight. A considerable portion, but not an undue amount, as generally speaking the higher one is on the ladder the more knowledge and experience they have.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}Agreed, which is why I want it to be a portion of the weight. A considerable portion, but not an undue amount, as generally speaking the higher one is on the ladder the more knowledge and experience they have.

But at that point why not cut it and force their knowledge and experience to speak for itself? That seems a much better way of handling the situation. If a player IS truly knowledgeable, experienced, and helpful to the community in a productive fashion, they shouldn't need an extra boost to get there.

All that boost would do is make the non-helpful Diamond players have an edge on the helpful Silver players right out of the gate.

redniwediS1 votes

When I say that Riot's classification system for champions is wonky and confusing and what a champion's role is can be simply summed up by the style of kit they have and the argument in return is "Nah uh, Riot said differently so you must be wrong"... I mean...

Linking the thread in case anyone reading is interested.

Ekitaih2 votes

{quoted}

I find it quite annoying that quality discussions are impossible to have for the most part because of (mostly) a handful of players who don't have the knowledge or experience to discuss a topic failing to discuss it and resorting to the tired old argument of "well your rank doesn't mean anything, you're an idiot" that is such bs to get on a daily basis.

Having to battle the mindless downvote herd of incompetence is why many of the posters who provided such insight will no longer post at all.

These two comments are the main reason why I don't feel I can take you seriously. They express your general attitude as a whole towards this entire discussion. First off is you give off an air of superiority. From the get go you ostracize a majority of the community because of your rank. It comes off as extremely elitist and this is why you get disregarded. "Having to battle the mindless downvote herd of incompetence...." Do you see why this comes off antagonistic? Do you see why so many people have been struggling to have a legitimate conversation with you? Second is your reasoning. You state that you're "tired of the old argument of 'well your rank doesn't mean anything...'" You're telling everyone the exact opposite. You're argument is "You're rank means everything," but it doesn't. People should be able to offer insight without being discriminated against based on their rank. I can see where it might be frustrating to be disregarded when you feel like you're trying to help. But if you talk to them the way you have portrayed yourself in this thread, I can see where people might try to disregard you. Your entire original post was rooted in superiority. I apologize for my previous heated response. It's almost too easy to fly off the handle when posting to someone that you literally don't even know all because you don't see that person. You can't hear that person. So respect and reason get tossed aside because anonymity makes us feel powerful. It's good to have a reality check every so often.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

{quoted}

I apologize for my previous heated response. It's almost too easy to fly off the handle when posting to someone that you literally don't even know all because you don't see that person. You can't hear that person. So respect and reason get tossed aside because anonymity makes us feel powerful. It's good to have a reality check every so often.

Good.

The problem is that many posters don't REALIZE they are being disrespectful to other posters when they do the things they do.

I am not one of them. I'm VERY aware of just how disrespectful some of things I can do are. I'm VERY aware of just how condescending I sound at times.

Its done on purpose. To show others how I feel about it being done to me (and others who don't quite feel like taking the time to do this or risking an account to do this) by people with even less qualifications. I don't want people to just take my word for everything. I'm human and am wrong pretty regularly. But I want the back and forth on these matters to remain RESPECTFUL of the posters and their accomplishments in game. I can't stand seeing a non argument used as a valid argument when it never was and never will be valid. And this is all too often the type of debate point resorted to by a specific subset of players more often than anything else. It discourages discussion, discourages community interaction, and encourages maintaining of the status quo.

You can be upset or offended all you want by statements like "the downvote herd/hive mentality of incompetence", but the fact of the matter is that this IS THE CASE! And it has been for years. And I have spent LITERALLY YEARS trying to fight that mentality in one form or another and watched as it oscillates back and froth from population subset to population subset.

I'm not actually trying to get a person's "rank" to be the end all be all here. I'm trying to get the MERIT OF THE ARGUMENT ITSELF to be the most important factor as things, as they currently stand, do not support that.

A meritless argument should not be allowed.

A meritable argument should receive the attention it deserves.

Ekitaih2 votes

{quoted}

Good.

The problem is that many posters don't REALIZE they are being disrespectful to other posters when they do the things they do.

I am not one of them. I'm VERY aware of just how disrespectful some of things I can do are. I'm VERY aware of just how condescending I sound at times.

Its done on purpose. To show others how I feel about it being done to me (and others who don't quite feel like taking the time to do this or risking an account to do this) by people with even less qualifications. I don't want people to just take my word for everything. I'm human and am wrong pretty regularly. But I want the back and forth on these matters to remain RESPECTFUL of the posters and their accomplishments in game. I can't stand seeing a non argument used as a valid argument when it never was and never will be valid. And this is all too often the type of debate point resorted to by a specific subset of players more often than anything else. It discourages discussion, discourages community interaction, and encourages maintaining of the status quo.

You can be upset of offended all you want by statements like "the downvote herd/hive mentality of incompetence", but the fact of the matter is that this IS THE CASE! And it has been for years. And I have spent LITERALLY YEARS trying to fight that mentality in one form or another and watched as it oscillates back and froth from population subset to population subset.

I'm not actually trying to get a person's "rank" to be the end all be all here. I'm trying to get the MERIT OF THE ARGUMENT ITSELF to be the most important factor as things, as they currently stand, do not support that.

A meritless argument should not be allowed.

A meritable argument should receive the attention it deserves.

Don't you think that starting posts like this is basically stacking the deck though? It just seems counter-intuitive. Almost like your opening yourself to controversy rather than provide a respectful discussion. If you go in expecting something to happen and trying to incite it, usually it will happen. I would like to quote Gandhi (albeit quite cheesy, I know) "an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind." If you want to have more polite discussions, it's probably better by starting off in that manner.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

{quoted}

Don't you think that starting posts like this is basically stacking the deck though? It just seems counter-intuitive. Almost like your opening yourself to controversy rather than provide a respectful discussion. If you go in expecting something to happen and trying to incite it, usually it will happen.

I was trying to incite something to happen.

I was looking for a specific poster to respond in a certain fashion to help me prove my point conclusively.

I got exactly what I was looking for and once that point was made pretty concisely the real discussion started.

I'm relatively certain that strikes you as odd, but most things I do on the boards are pretty deliberate to make very specific points. Sometimes the methods are not always... tasteful? Shall we say?

But the point was made rather succinctly.

In any case, having made it at this point we can do away with the first layer of the thread and move to its other layers. Nothing I do is just for one purpose, there are typically several levels of thinking involved in most of my threads in order to make certain points in certain fashion and in a certain order.

This does not always work out the way I plan. Sometimes it backfires pretty hard actually when I over or underestimate a circumstance.

Sometimes it doesn't. An example for you to better help put this in context:

https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/2zef7p4Q-junglers-if-you-ever-once-ever-utter-the-phrase-i-need-leash-no-leash-no-gank

redniwediS2 votes

I was trying to incite something to happen.

I was looking for a specific poster to respond in a certain fashion to help me prove my point conclusively.

I got exactly what I was looking for and once that point was made pretty concisely the real discussion started.

But why? Why try and bait out a response instead of just start a normal discussion? Why continue to argue instead of reveal the bait for what it was and start a normal discussion from there? Why try and play the part of a puppet master when you can just talk to people like they are people?

This thread could have been so much simpler and far more constructive.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

{quoted}

But why? Why try and bait out a response instead of just start a normal discussion? Why continue to argue instead of reveal the bait for what it was and start a normal discussion from there? Why try and play the part of a puppet master when you can just talk to people like they are people?

It doesn't generate the right response typically and movement in the right direction.

This thread could have been so much simpler and far more constructive.

It could have been. And it would have been completely ignored. Yet another point layer in this onion of a thread.

It would have generated no response what so ever. But, happening to know you're on, your posting habits, and the little bit of drama we got into last night I could predict your response and if I crafted a thread just right elicit a certain response from you to make another point.

Your first post in that thread last night was pure failure to contribute. It was a nit pick over a classification that had nothing to do with the premise when any one and everyone knows exactly what the OP meant, melee non tanks in top lane. It was unbelievably rude of you to comment on that note in that way and immediately attempt to derail a thread with the first comment like that.

I took a guess you'd do the same thing here and that would bring up the point of the inadequacies in how the community handles these types of things and elicit immediate moderator interference.

The volunteers, whom I happen to converse with regularly, (and whom I know to be quite impartial) would then intercede to spur real discussion on how to correct certain flaws like this (without failing to admonish both me and any other wrong doers) and bring the subject to the greater attention of the community at large (to a degree) while also working diligently to find a possible solution to a problem we all can agree on at least in some respects.

7 years of boards posting history has left me a little cynical maybe about how things actually get done on the boards, but one thing that is for certain is that only the truly polarizing posts get real attention. If I had constructed this post with less bite it simply would have been ignored. If it had more it would have been nipped. With it pretty much exactly how it is I got to make half a dozen points all at once and bring up the issue for greater consideration among the volunteers as a collective.

Which kind of brings me to the last point: I shouldn't have to do things like this to get some issues to be looked into. A thread should be able to be judged simply on the merit of its premise and all too often that is simply not the case and this, in turn, discourages participation on the boards.

Now, if you feel wronged by this, then I do apologize. I feel pretty dirty myself. But it was effective, and it did work as planned for the most part.

More over, I believe in this thread you have been given a prime example of what positively contributing discussion looks like, even between dissenting parties and the hope (at the end of all this) is that players learn from this example, think more critically, and choose to be more thoughtful and respectful with the way they participate on the boards. Hopefully the volunteers gain a little insight on what might cause some of these flare ups to occur and be more vigilant looking for them in the future. And, hopefully, I decide to be a little less angsty about the state of the boards if concern is shown for these types of issues and that work is being done to improve the state of the boards.

Lots of levels. I don't typically create threads, mostly I just respond. But when I do make one I try to get as much out of it as I can unless its just a joke thread for GD.

redniwediS1 votes

Your first post in that thread last night was pure failure to contribute. It was a nit pick over a classification that had nothing to do with the premise when any one and everyone knows exactly what the OP meant, melee non tanks in top lane. It was unbelievably rude of you to comment on that note in that way and immediately attempt to derail a thread with the first comment like that.

While it was off topic for the thread I still feel we need to be specific when talking about groups of champions, and I don't feel Bruiser is accurate enough. That is why I felt the need to reply as I did, and as far as I can tell looking back at it there was nothing rude about it. I tried to be constructive as you replied to me, and hopefully you can see that.

Which kind of brings me to the last point: I shouldn't have to do things like this to get some issues to be looked into.

I honestly don't believe you have to. Lots of upvotes and replies might get you on the Hot page, but I've seen ideas spread from threads with 10 upvotes. You don't need to have a large audience if you get the right audience.

Now, if you feel wronged by this, then I do apologize. I feel pretty dirty myself. But it was effective, and it did work as planned for the most part.

It is very frustrating to be toyed with like this. I absolutely cannot stand anyone with a superiority complex, and have been yelled a few times over the years for arguments pretty darn similar to this one by moderators, so I can definitely see why you might choose me for this. Still, it feels horrible knowing I was used to make a point that I would have loved to actually discuss in a constructive environment against my will.

I've been a part of far more constructive threads than I have unconstructive ones since I first started posting on here, and to be treated like this just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. If you had contacted me in game or via an old thread of mine I'd have gladly had a mock argument with you, or even just had an honest discussion that focused on my posting habits. I'm not opposed to being the focus of a thread, only in the manner you went about it.

I do accept your apology though, and hope the one post sarcastic remarks I enjoy making don't get in the way of any future constructive discussions we might have.

I took a guess you'd do the same thing here and that would bring up the point of the inadequacies in how the community handles these types of things and elicit immediate moderator interference.

This is the one thing that gets me though. I didn't actually want a moderator to step in, I was fired up and ready to keep arguing, so unless Djinn stumbled upon the thread someone else must have reported one of us, or both.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

{quoted}

This is the one thing that gets me though. I didn't actually want a moderator to step in, I was fired up and ready to keep arguing, so unless Djinn stumbled upon the thread someone else must have reported one of us, or both.

I reported both of us.

Lol.

I'm weird, I'll get more in depth for this response later. Driving ATM.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}

I reported both of us.

And yet, amusingly, I just read the thread before seeing any reports. We DO pay attention to threads here.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=00070001000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-12-07T01:46:47.089+0000)

And yet, amusingly, I just read the thread before seeing any reports. We DO pay attention to threads here.

I was wondering how you responded to it like 3 whole seconds later... I was like "good lord that response time, omg!"

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

{quoted}

While it was off topic for the thread I still feel we need to be specific when talking about groups of champions, and I don't feel Bruiser is accurate enough. That is why I felt the need to reply as I did, and as far as I can tell looking back at it there was nothing rude about it. I tried to be constructive as you replied to me, and hopefully you can see that.

The thread is on the topic of top lane melee picks and the lackluster performance and viability they have. Bruisers is more than specific enough as it accounts for all the weird and poorly classified "subclasses" like fighter or skirmisher. It was an all encompassing statement that didn't need further clarification as any one who reads it is easily able to understand what is being discussed: non tank top lane melee picks.

A comment like yours as the first response marginalized the entire effort the OP put into that thread, essentially says "you're dumb, it's not forest, its 'rainforest'" when we're still talking about the health of trees. I (and I'm sure others) felt that was a pretty offensive and rude thing to do. It's something done on a regular basis (typically by lower level players when being this nit picky specific) and doesn't actually add to the premise of the post in any meaningful way and is liable to confuse other posters.

That's why my first response was to just get it to the nitty gritty, simple ways to identify champions by kit that's less confusing and attempt to get the thread back on track as the topic was a good one and the OP put in some work on it and it's a topic being heavily discussed the last week or so.

Nit picking pointlessly without contributing to a discussion is generally considered rude, often considered spam, and is actually a violation of boards rules when it comes to contributing positively to discussions. And it's extremely commonplace and should be cleaned up.

I honestly don't believe you have to. Lots of upvotes and replies might get you on the Hot page, but I've seen ideas spread from threads with 10 upvotes. You don't need to have a large audience if you get the right audience.

I actually tend to agree here. But there are only a handful of us who are regular posters who actually understand how to reach our target audience (just look at how effective I was at reaching a very specific audience with this thread). Most posters don't have years and years of boards and writing experience and so they post a thread in a specific subsection in an attempt to get a topic to the right audience. And when the first thing that audience does is neglect the work done on the thread... well, it's pretty off putting.

It is very frustrating to be toyed with like this. I absolutely cannot stand anyone with a superiority complex, and have been yelled a few times over the years for arguments pretty darn similar to this one by moderators, so I can definitely see why you might choose me for this. Still, it feels horrible knowing I was used to make a point that I would have loved to actually discuss in a constructive environment against my will.

Totally understandable. Ask the vols how they feel when I pull this kind of a move. They hate it too, everyone got used and it leaves me feeling like a douche, but sometimes these things have to happen or else the situation or issue goes entirely unnoticed as it did for a good 15 hours. And ultimately what happens when it goes unnoticed is that others see it (particularly in trending threads) and it appears that things become acceptable when they really aren't right in the first place. As more and more people see and follow the example it breeds in the posting population until it becomes commonplace. So common place that many important posters and Riot personnel feel as if it's not worth interacting because of accepted status quo and the negative repercussions it tends to have on these types of posters.

This, of course, stifles community growth and game growth. Which is a bad thing.

I've been a part of far more constructive threads than I have unconstructive ones since I first started posting on here, and to be treated like this just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. If you had contacted me in game or via an old thread of mine I'd have gladly had a mock argument with you, or even just had an honest discussion that focused on my posting habits. I'm not opposed to being the focus of a thread, only in the manner you went about it.

Well I won't comment on the constructive versus unconstructive posts, as it's neither here nor there at this point in the conversation and would be in poor taste, but I will say that it was a pretty manipulative thing to do and would indeed be better if you opted into a discussion about it willingly.

I don't believe for a second you would have been willing prior to today's activity, but I've been known to be wrong in the past.

I do accept your apology though, and hope the one post sarcastic remarks I enjoy making don't get in the way of any future constructive discussions we might have.

It's not the sarcasm. It's the apparent condescension from an unqualified individual that doesn't add to a post constructively and appears to slight the work of the OP. With regularity.

Jokes I'm all for. Everyone loves a funny. But jokes and funny stuff belong on GD and M&G. Our other boards are supposed to be for serious discussion.

We want newer players to be able to use the gameplay board to sharpen their understanding of the game and improve their skills. When other newer players get in the way of that occurrence or present confusing or misleading information it tends to make the boards an unattractive option to acquire this type of information and people flock elsewhere, fracturing and dividing the community making it much harder for concerns to be be universally addressed. Which is a bad thing.

This is the one thing that gets me though. I didn't actually want a moderator to step in, I was fired up and ready to keep arguing

I know, and it was clear at that point that I was contributing negatively and assisting in the creation of a vicious circle. When I no longer trust myself to handle an issue without blowing several gaskets I try to bring in some more level headed folks (that I trust rather implicitly) to set a good example.

I understand that many posters are just as unaware as you were that what you do innocently is perceived by many (maybe even most) as rudeness and or an intentional slight. What I think it boils down to is that threads in our more serious sections require more critical thinking and measured responses. It's fine to be critical of a thing, but that criticism must have a POINT attached to it and that point must be valid or else one is just insulting the work and effort of another in order to feel better about themself and that has no place anywhere on the boards except as an inside joke among friends on the community subsections.

redniwediS1 votes

Well, I think I can safely say you read too far into my posts. You're getting a lot of stuff from them that I don't intend, so either I'm wording my posts in an odd manner (that should get a response from other people, and it's not) or you're reading between the lines when my intention is just the face value of my words.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

{quoted}

Well, I think I can safely say you read too far into my posts.

Certainly possible, but mostly I think many posters just don't realize that the things they post are incredibly rude to people who put in hard work and effort and they are posting these rude or bothersome things purely out of ignorance. The ultimate effect of which is that less people want to put in effort only to see it trashed and resort instead to low effort hive mind supported posts that cause the whole echo chamber effect and is part and parcel of why certain folks are discouraged to post here.

One thing for you to consider as a bit of a focus from all of todays discourse: When you are the very first person to respond to a thread consider the content of your response carefully because the first two or three responses generally sets the tone for an entire thread.

An example of a first response to a thread I made last night (immediately downvoted as well, had to smurf correct back to one before people started to destroy the comment and the thread) where I carefully considered what the thread needed to move its conversation in the appropriate direction:

{quoted}

It's pretty simple in a nutshell honestly.

Bruisers can't fight mages who don't interact and wave clear and gain an income advantage.

Bruisers can't fight ranged champions who harass them out of lane and gain an income advantage.

Bruisers can't fight tanks who are too durable to trade meaningfully with and will instantly kill a bruiser with jungler assistance and thus gain an income advantage.

Bruisers can't fight most assassins who outrade them early in games zoning them off farm and gaining an income advantage.

Bruisers just can't acquire income because they can't farm and an item dependent class that can't farm is just going to be useless.

It's a summary of what the video really says distilled to its simplest form so that even those posters who do not want to watch the whole video can understand the discussion being had and comment on it in an informed manner and then converse on the topic starting from a common ground of understanding.

Interestingly enough it's worth noting that THIS thread received little attention despite having quality content and reputable sources purely stating the case without bias. It's one of the most meritable threads posted to Gameplay all of yesterday. Meanwhile...

redniwediS1 votes

One thing for you to consider as a bit of a focus for all of todays discourse: When you are the very first person to respond to a thread consider the content of your response carefully because the first two or three responses generally sets the tone for an entire thread.

Personally I think my first post here was very appropriate considering the tone your bait post had. I'll agree that the first few replies help set the tone for the discussion, but honestly the thread creator still has the largest say on that front.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}Just for the sake of clarity: both first 2 responses in this thread were highly inappropriate. Ahris, whom we know quite well and I interact with daily and mostly don't have much of an issue with despite the spammy troll posts chose a really bad time to be spammy and trolly in a thread NOT on GD with GD posting customs, didn't contribute to the discussion, immediately downvoted, responded with some standard inane gimmicky ahri qq derailing the thread once. Nothing about that behavior is acceptable. Followed by you copy catting in fashion and believing it was acceptable. Derailing the thread again and also immediately downvoting.

Okay. Now is the time to knock it off. If you see a post you consider a problem, report it. Please do not play moderator in a post you yourself admitted was INTENDED to draw controversial reactions, especially when you're singling out individuals and especially given our conversation about your own recent behavior.

If you see a post you feel is an issue, ignore it and report it. There isn't a need to engage on the merit or lack thereof, and that goes doubly so if you are simply being accusatory. You derail your own discussion faster that way than if you simply ignored the comment entirely.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}

It's been reported. Yesterday.

It should be acted on.

A report ensures the issue will be looked at. A report does NOT ensure the post in question will be removed. There is a bit of discretion in what does and doesn't get moderated, and there are a few reasons for that.

  1. Because situations are sometimes complex, and often the work required to remove one minor reported offense involves culling an entire conversation from a valuable thread to do minor issues.
  2. Because we let small things slide occasionally, or we'd be cracking down on a metric ton of behavior there's simply no way to properly handle.
  3. Because some of the community has a much stricter sense of what should and shouldn't be allowed than the volunteer team, and we can't please everyone all the time.

If you have specific concerns you're welcome to come to the Discord to ask why action was or wasn't taken on a specific post, and we can have someone take a look. I cannot promise we'll necessarily agree with your opinion on the subject though.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}I'm relatively certain that strikes you as odd, but most things I do on the boards are pretty deliberate to make very specific points. Sometimes the methods are not always... tasteful? Shall we say?

And I would ask you to stop using distasteful methods to start conversations. The initial behavior shown by several parties in this thread was not acceptable, and I do not want to see it in the future.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8GeaU7T,comment-id=0007000100010000000000000001,timestamp=2017-12-06T22:29:35.826+0000)

And I would ask you to stop using distasteful methods to start conversations. The initial behavior shown by several parties in this thread was not acceptable, and I do not want to see it in the future.

Roger that bud.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

it is an intense topic and certainly one where people feel heated over it, but please if at all possible do not close it down.

I feel as if there is something good to be had from discussing this topic, and the OP and I are having a lovely conversation about rank vs reputation and how to ensure that quality posts get the attention they deserve.

oOBestEveNAOo2 votes

{quoted}

quality posts get the attention they deserve.

This is really the whole reason for doing this.

Posters should not have to convince a portion of the regular posting population to counter upvote a worthy topic with smurf armies just to get the worthy topic attention that it deserves.

Come to think of it... This is a discussion that really should include more thought on the removal of downvotes entirely from the boards as a whole as this is a primary means of the herd stifling worthwhile topics.

oOBestEveNAOo1 votes

Already in just this thread we can clearly see the problem.

A pair of mindless downvotes by low level players.

Posts by said players that don't contribute to the discussion and attempt to derail it.

This is the height of rudeness. It's no wonder no one wants to post in Gameplay when this is what always happens.

redniwediS4 votes

What is rude is ignoring the play environment of the majority of League players. Diamond and higher players play in a very different environment, and changes they may find agreeable can ruin the game for the majority.

The moment I see diamond players, and players who claim to be diamond, post about problems bronze and silvers deal with and how they can be fixed is the moment I will put some amount of trust in the ability for diamond players to talk about overall gameplay balance. There are only a few regular posters who fit this description, with most diamond+ posters thinking they know better and everything else can be solved by learning to play.

The boards are a place for all players to discuss the game. What we need is a more strict set of rules for the moderators to moderate threads with, not an entitled elite looking down on everyone else.

More from Discuss the Boards

Boards Profile Syncing Tool
Discuss the Boards1 comments
201
votes
I am honestly getting very tired of the Boards community.
Discuss the Boards285 comments
195
votes
Alright...so this is somehow punishable now?
Discuss the Boards247 comments
146
votes
Universal Board Rules
Discuss the Boards0 comments
123
votes
Dividers for yours post
Discuss the Boards73 comments
121
votes
A moderator that cannot be named.
Discuss the Boards95 comments
118
votes

More by oOBestEveNAOo

Watching Bjerg play Zoe.
General Discussion194 comments
159
votes
Here's the absolute best tip you will ever get to win more games.
Gameplay92 comments
75
votes
Here's the Akali nerf I really want to see:
Gameplay58 comments
33
votes
You know what I hate most about the current state of League?
Gameplay38 comments
26
votes
So uh... about Sylas...
General Discussion34 comments
23
votes
So the State of Top Lane isn't peachy, here's a potential solution for itemization
Gameplay92 comments
13
votes