Surrender Vote.

urgeN·Dec 26, 2019·6 votes·1,346 views

It is absurd to not let 3/5 votes pass for surrendering at any stage of the game. It is against democracy. Most of the times it is plain stupid.

This is a major problem. It is so easy to solve. Will you do it ?

11 Comments

Darkdemon653Dec 26, 20195 votes

Democracy is absurd as well. Believing that a group should be allowed to enslave all others by virtue of having the highest population is sociopathic at best.

Ido BexiDec 26, 20193 votes

{quoted}

Democracy is absurd as well. Believing that a group should be allowed to enslave all others by virtue of having the highest population is sociopathic at best.

Are you dumb? The smaller group here is enslaving the majority. Your garbage logic is absurd

urgeNDec 27, 20191 votes

Democracy's flaw is that a majority of people , that do not comprehend the complexity of the decision and it's impact that emanates from their will CAN overwhelm the will of a minority that is better equipped to decide. Unfortunately your argument is wrong because one, it is using the term "enslave" which has mostly another meaning that what it means to decide and second, in a LOL game, presuming the system on which the players are selected is fair, every player has a pertinent vote.

SmackledorbDec 26, 20193 votes

it sucks to be stuck in those extra hopeless games. but a lot of the time people are just tilted and wanna surrender a winnable game.

urgeNDec 27, 20191 votes

This is about the right to choose here. I've won 4 v 5 and 4 v 6 games ( with a player that is "running it down mid type of games). I've lost at the same time games where they were 4 and we 5. I strongly believe players should have the option to play or not while at the same time respecting the choice of the others. If 3 players don't want to play and 2 do and the 2 decide that the 3 should keep playing, i believe that's immoral.

HotarµDec 26, 20192 votes

It is absurd to not let 3/5 votes pass for surrendering at any stage of the game. It is against democracy. Most of the times it is plain stupid.

This is a major problem. It is so easy to solve. Will you do it ?

There is nothing to "solve" here. It's not a bug or unintended outcome, Riot has always had the minimum 4/5 vote requirement. They were nice enough to add the FF@15 vote, which IMO shouldn't even have been added in the first place.

Also, 3/5 might be the majority, but it is not the vast, large, or overwhelming majority (terms for something requiring 70%+ of the population to be in agreement.)

Inkling CommandoDec 26, 20192 votes

what a bunch of snowflakes. I give a suggestion and you report it causing it to be removed.

HotarµDec 26, 20193 votes

Yeah... I mean, that will happen when you're actively advocating violations of the rules by telling people to AFK when a surrender vote doesn't pass.

Also, just curious, why are you telling people to AFK when I've seen you complain about AFKers multiple times?

Inkling CommandoDec 26, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Also, just curious, why are you telling people to AFK when I've seen you complain about AFKers multiple times?

you're mistaking me for someone else. I don't give a rat's ass if you afk. nor do I care if you int your ass off or flame to hell and back. only thing that pisses me off is surrendering. when you call a ff vote and players say no we mean no. nothing will ever change that. if you want to leave a game so badly you'll eat the penalty from DC'ing.

Ido BexiDec 26, 20191 votes

{quoted}

It is absurd to not let 3/5 votes pass for surrendering at any stage of the game. It is against democracy. Most of the times it is plain stupid.

This is a major problem. It is so easy to solve. Will you do it ?

No, they won't.