About these whole "Dynamic Queue reduces toxicity" satire threads

Mister Support·7/2/2016, 7:05:47 PM·2 votes·265 views

Just a fair warning to any readers out there, if the content of the post is just one example of a toxic moment the person had, then don't take the point of the post seriously. The statement about dynamic queue that Riot made said that it Reduces toxicity. However, most of the people making these are counter-arguing as if it was supposed to have Eliminated toxicity, which it didn't. Reduces only means that it occurs less often. There's no real way for your average player to know if Dynamic queue actually reduced toxicity or not. There are inferences we can make and it's up to you to judge for yourself which you think would hold up stronger.

  1. Dynamic queue could reduce toxicity because players would be in better environment when playing with friends that would help them remain calm and avoid becoming toxic towards others.

  2. Dynamic queue could partially increase toxicity because if the group is in a bad situation (everyone fed and losing hard), they may divert anger away from themselves in order to cope with the situation, thus making for a larger number of people being toxic in that moment. However, the problem with this is that there's no way to know if it was all solos put in a similar situation the number of them that would be toxic. It could be all of them, it could be only one.

Personally, I think the first point has a stronger impact so I do believe that dynamic has reduced that amount of toxicity that occurs.

Another point that I've seen is that Riot's data is invalid since a premade group wouldn't report their own member for being toxic, lowering the number of reports seen. The flaw in this claim, is that the data looked at the number of games with at least one report in it, not the number of reports overall. So in that regard, the data is still valid (also for anyone that doesn't know, reports merely flag games to be checked, so one report will have the same exact effect as 9 reports).

0 Comments