Allow Tribunal to See Post Game Chat

the Anarchit3cht·Apr 30, 2014·16 votes·2,547 views

The Tribunal, if it really wants to do its job effectively needs to be able to see the post game chat. A LOT of players simply wait until the game ends to do their trash talking. And while you can mute them, or just leave... that's not really as good a solution as it sounds. Maybe you want to tell your team that they did awesome, or give kudos to the enemy you faced in lane. You should be able to do that without having to go through the abuse of toxic players. Yes, you can ignore them. But if you had no idea they are going to be toxic, and they start talking crap as soon as you get into the lobby, it's kind of already done. You can mute them, but that doesn't erase what they've said or fix their attitude. They display this sort of behavior so vehemently in post game chat because they know it can't be seen by the tribunal and there is effectively no way for them to be punished. Let me make this clear, I know that I will never see them in another game most likely, especially if I ignore them, but that doesn't prevent them from displaying this kind of behavior to other players.

tl;dr: Tribunal needs to see post game chat to effectively carry out it's job. Yes, I know I can mute and that I most likely won't ever see players like that again, but doing that doesn't prevent them from acting like that towards the rest of the community.

34 Comments

Sir ArmaMalumApr 30, 20143 votes

From what I understand the reason this isn't already the case is the fact that pre/post-game chat is within the AIR client and the tribunal pulls solely from the game client which are two different beasts. I don't know how difficult it is to fix but I'm assuming very seeing as this is still a problem.

To quote Lyte in the Tribunal FAQ

Does Tribunal show pre-game and post-game chat?
This is something in our backlog, however we are working on some higher priority features to improve Tribunal.

Granted it's a dated quote but they are aware of the need for this.

ThalesMay 1, 20143 votes

I don't think it's really needed. From my time in the Tribunal, few cases aren't clear cut. If I had to guess, several reports where there's no clear cause are because of abusive behavior post-game, which is borne out by the report comments.

Therefore, I usually do report people who only cross the line in after-game chat. I just make sure to indicate such in my report comments. A tribunaler may believe me to be lying, but the fact is that most people who are abusive in after-game chat don't have the self-control to rein their behavior in to only there.

Hyrum GraffMay 1, 20141 votes

the fact is that most people who are abusive in after-game chat don't have the self-control to rein their behavior in to only there.

This... well, let me give an example. I don't think not a toxic player. I try really hard to be positive no matter how hard our team is losing. I mute players who are toxic, and report them after. I give encouragement in-game. I try to call peoople out on being toxic and encourage them to be nice to each other.

But on the rare occasions that I do feel like I need to blow off steam, I do it in post-game chat. Why? Because when you say "This botlane tho," in game, that makes botlane perform worse. So I hold my toungue until after the game, when it's already lost. I don't know if there's a similar phenomenon amongst ragers or not, I'm just noting that there are reasons to be toxic post-game but not in-game.

ThalesMay 1, 20142 votes

That's a solid point. But I'm also more willing to let people who don't rage in game slip through the cracks than those that do. Besides, from what you're saying, you don't sound like the "OMG UNINSTALL YOU &^#&# #&**^ NOOB" type. l have to admit that I also gripe about poor play from teammates, but only after they're gone.

What I'm talking about are the wildly unacceptable people. Usually, for those on my team, it doesn't come completely out of the blue, but their behavior, though not great, didn't actually cross the line in game. There are rare exceptions, but raging in after-game chat, however nastily, is less bad than doing so in game because you don't have a captive audience.

I think seeing pre and post game chat would provide minimal benefit in most cases, and would usually just be a distraction. It wouldn't surprise me if Riot does have some means to detect people who behave really clearly awfully in pre or post game chat, and if nothing else, there's the Player Support method of reporting. I used that recently to report a guy who was acting rather unacceptably in pregame chat, and then finally dodged. In specific cases like that, which are far outnumbered by the standard in-game toxicity, Riot has the manpower to check those without major resource expenditure.

the Anarchit3chtMay 1, 20141 votes

The player support method is highly ineffective. 90% of the time, you get a generic reply that shows no one actually read what you said. Then a good majority of the time from there, you never(or at least this is what happens to me) get a reply after said generic reply. They don't have to include details of the punishment, but it's a little disheartening to get no reply and in most cases I assume they just don't really care all too much.

And while I agree with many of the points you're making the fact is this--post game or in game, raging/excessively mean trash talking (for instance, this was said to me one game by a player who showed absolutely NO signs of being toxic in game, "I hope your dad fucks you and then you kill yourself.") is still going to cause a negative impact on players that makes them want to play less.

That being said, while the benefits might not be huge, how would they would be a distraction? It's just more data to look at that I think would actually heavily improve the Tribunal's ability to regulate. In both punishing and pardoning. For example, maybe a player gets reported for a few questionable comments in game. But let's say they weren't overly bad so you would elect to pardon them. Then in the post game chat they get 200x nastier. That behavior would probably push the decision more towards punish rather than pardon. Or, even the opposite. Maybe you are leaning towards punishment after those comments, and in the post game chat the person explains why they behaved in that way(not that it makes it acceptable, but perhaps understandable).

EDIT: And while I understand that entirely, I don't tell people I'm reporting them. Of course that is just going to make them nasty. All too often it happens like this, "Wow, that was a good game. You really gave me a tough time in lane back there, but my team responded well. Honor for that." To which they reply, "U SUCK NOOB GO FUK URSELF" or something as equally vulgar.

ThalesMay 1, 20141 votes

The player support is boiler-plate, and it would be nice to know if it actually makes a difference, but we ultimately don't know. Looking up a guy I reported through those means, he's shown no signs of a ban or of changing his ways, but in his case, I'm sure the regular tribunal will get to him sooner or later.

Adding after-game chat certainly won't help with false punishes, and it might not help much with false pardons. There's already a lot of material to read through in the average tribunal case; adding a whole other set of logs would just tire tribunalers out sooner.

For what it's worth, I've actually managed to talk to problem players who I report, and sometimes get them to understand that they shouldn't be acting that way. If they don't immediately blow me off, most people become fairly reasonable after just a bit of talking.

the Anarchit3chtMay 1, 20141 votes

Again, Riot has privacy concerns so that's why you don't get know if punishment was handed out. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the fact that you have no idea if they are actually looking into your issue or just ignoring you. I've literally typed of a bunch of gibberish and gotten the same exact reply as I have when I had a legitimate request.

As for your second paragraph, how do you figure not? You have to explain to the points you make.

EDIT: Oh, and I don't see how being lazy is less of a reason to provide better coverage of issues like that. So should cops not have to file police reports because they already have to go through the trouble of apprehending the suspects? Your logic there is flawed.

ThalesMay 1, 20142 votes

With cops, it's their job. With tribunalers, it's entirely volunteer. No obligation, no reward. There's a completely different batch of incentives. That's why the Tribunal is so gamified, rather than just being like paperwork. Riot wants to give people enough information to come to a conclusion without overloading them.. And in 99% of cases, it is.

It won't help with false punishes because there aren't really mitigating factors to someone wishing cancerous death upon their foes. True, there are some people who escape punishment by only being toxic pre- and post-game. But these are extremely few, and inherently less problematic than those who flame and rage in game. As I said, you don't have a captive audience in after-game chat.

Would the benefits of catching those few people who limit their toxicity to after-game chat outweigh the losses of throwing more generally useless information at tribunalers? Perhaps, but any gain would be marginal. And there's still the technical matter: after game chat works in an entirely different way from in-game chat, and it would take considerable effort to integrate it with the Tribunal system, and the Player Behavior Team just has higher priorities.

MakersFMay 2, 20142 votes

You can always ignore the post game chat and use the normal log (i image the aftergame chat would be shown in a different part of the page compared by the ingame chat)

BTW the first thing i do i go to the end of the chat because if someone flames then it is more probably when they are going to lose. Having post game chat make this even easier, because then's when they start to insult and QQ against people the most

the Anarchit3chtMay 2, 20141 votes

Sorry I addressed your points out of order, but here:

Exactly what the other guy said. It's not like they HAVE to look at that post game chat. Generally though, if the abuse WAS in post game chat, then it is mentioned in the report and it could be helpful to see that when reviewing that particular case. You're going off the basis here that they are going to read every last line of text. If the report doesn't mention any abuse in post game chat--then don't look at it. It's as simple as that.

While I do see the point in the difficulty of integrating, as I mentioned above, it's not outright impossible--Riot already links the ingame client with the AIR client in other ways such as being able to see match statistics and crests of honor.

I agree. It's not as bad because you don't have a captive audience. But it can still be very hurtful to players and discourage them to continue playing LoL to hear such things as 'I hope your dad fucks you before you kill yourself' even if they can just leave and not listen to the guy. As I said, leaving and ignoring him doesn't erase what he said, nor does it prevent him from continuing said behavior towards other members of the community--which should be the ultimate goal of the tribunal anyway. At the point of abuse, any punishment handed out by the tribunal is wholly irrelevant for helping the abused player, but rather it's designed to prevent that type of abuse from being shown to other players.

EDIT: And while I agree there is no "obligation" there is most definitely a reward to doing the tribunal, although it might be a little impersonal, and that is... a less toxic community.

Also, I believe this problem is a little more widespread than you're giving it credit for. I'll admit the fact that most toxic players will be toxic in game as well, but I think players being toxic only in post/pre game chat is more problematic than you think.

RiotBuboBuboMay 12, 20143 votes

I know this is a little bit of a necro but +1 to Anarchit3cht and Thales for a well written and thoughtful discussion.

For those reading through - I recommend the "show as flat" forum option for this one

the Anarchit3chtMay 14, 20141 votes

Oh wow, a Red actually stopped through here :p

WashuMay 1, 20142 votes

To be honest, I've seen the "sweetest people" turn into absolute monsters as soon as the game was over. I have seen a Sona go full on sailor mode in post game chat on their ADC. I'm not saying never rage because this community makes it hard not to do, and everyone gets frustrated, but there are limits.

TheInferno123May 1, 20142 votes

The reason why they don't include post and pre game chats? Because its incredibly hard, near impossible to do seeing they use two completely different clients for those instances, im sure if they put a large amount of time and effort and money into it they could, but as it is, they can improve the game in so many other ways much faster and better. It would need to find the game in both clients and count them as one game, doing so, creating only another gateway between the two clients, increasing vulnerabilities, increasing cheaters/instability, increasing complaints and need for tribunal.

Its simply better for them to leave it as it is unless they want to make some radical changes to the structure of the game.

HazeyInDaHeadMay 1, 20141 votes

Its like riot doesnt have a lot of time money or employees for effort...

the Anarchit3chtMay 1, 20141 votes

Incredibly hard, near impossible ? Where do you get that from that? I understand they are two different clients, but you have no real reasoning that getting the data from one client would be harder other than mere speculation that honestly makes little sense.

You're whole nonsense about about linking the clients can't be that hard--Riot has already done. Otherwise how could they provide you your stats from games in the Air client? Or how would they associate honor given(in the Air client) with the banner shown(in game client)? I'm not saying you're wrong, merely that I'd like to see some rationale behind the claims you are making. As I see them now, they fall short of being good reasons.

ThalesMay 2, 20142 votes

@Anarchit3ct: For some reason, I am unable to directly respond to your most recent post. Probably a post depth limit on the forums.

I'll be brief: I don't deny that the problem exists, but it is a rare one, and not one without recourse. Remember, for the Tribunal not to catch those people who flame you after game, they need to not just not flame you during the game, they need to never flame anyone during the game. And there's still Player Support reports or reports with good descriptions.

Riot Player Behavior has only so many people, and they have made clear on many occasions that the Tribunal and banning people are not intended to be the primary thrust of their mission. The Tribunal, in fact, predates the current Player Behavior crew. Look at the recent major Player Behavior initiatives, Honor and Team Builder. These aren't easy to do, but they probably have far greater ramifications on reducing toxicity than incremental improvements to the Tribunal system would. Would you trade Team Builder for after game chat in Tribunal?

the Anarchit3chtMay 3, 20141 votes

Post reply limit is exactly is it. Standard recourse is, however, to reply to a different post of their's so they get an update. Had this not been my thread, I would not have gotten an notification as to your reply.

Do you have any sources indicating the the Tribunal is strictly for "in game" behavior? As far as I am concerned, the Tribunal is to stop toxicity. Secondly, I don't see how what you are saying there is much different from what I'm saying. Bottom line: They need to not flame people. Whether that is in game or post game, it shouldn't matter because it wholly has the same effect.

Again, it's not the banning/punishment I care about it. It's about ending the toxicity. As I said above, the player being banned/punished will literally have no effect on me. It's about stopping that toxicity from reaching other players. They have other initiatives, yes, but they are actually limited in what they are capable of doing. Honor for one, is such a small and biased reward... it affects only a handful of players--and that, most of the players with crests are actively engaged in Honor Trading, thus actually still being very toxic despite having such banners. All "Honor" does actually, is create a further divide between "good" and "bad" players which is actually going to only lead to MORE toxicity, not less. Secondly, team builder. That only stops the toxicity surrounding insta-locking, lane stealing etc. That is but a small portion of toxicity. And tell me, why does it have to be a "trade" you are acting as if it is impossible to have both of these features. Frankly, it's not. Frankly, Riot has more than enough resources to do both of these AND MORE. Your argument is invalid, you're raising points that actually have no basis nor are grounded in anything other than a sturdy militant attitude you have to refuse to see the other side of the matter.

This issue happens more often than can be reasonably handled by support tickets. The magnitude at which this happens would see the Player Support swamped in so many tickets they couldn't ever possibly get around to them--which already seems to be an issue.

Please, if you reply, I'd actually like to see some real reasoning behind you not wanting this feature. I'm not saying it's something that has to be put in the game tomorrow, but that, ultimately, in order for the Tribunal to be as effective as it could be, this is a feature that needs to be included.

ThalesMay 3, 20142 votes

(Part 2 of 3)

There's more than one way to stop toxicity. Honor is positive reinforcement. Behavior Alerts help nudge people away from an edge they might not be aware they're treading near. And the Tribunal is a last resort.

Consider a person who is toxic only in after-game chat. They must have solid knowledge of how the Tribunal works, and they must have either outstanding self-control to never let their rage slip during the game, or they must be actively and maliciously intending to play normally and flame people only after the game. And they must do this regularly. The Tribunal is not designed to catch everyone who once lashes out at their team. Only the most consistent and pernicious offenders will make it there. It shouldn’t catch you, who occasionally calls a teammate bad in after-game chat. Its target might not even be the person who wished incestuous relations on your nuclear family, provided he didn’t say such things frequently. The post-game-only flamer is a boogeyman — if such people exist, they're vanishing in number.

I do have evidence: the lack of Tribunal cases where a person has zero offensive behavior in game. I am a regular Tribunaler. I'm one of the more highly rated ones, actually. I don't know how much you use the Tribunal, but I have run into very few cases where the player isn't behaving inappropriately in game in at least some of the games. If there really were a plague of post-game toxicity without corroborating in-game toxicity, I should be seeing a lot more cases where in every game I have zero evidence from chat or items that a player is in any way toxic. In fact, such players would probably be pardoned! After all, if they're not, then I guess the Tribunal doesn't need post-game chat.

Looking at cases where people got pardoned, we don’t see the pattern we would expect to find in the rampant post-game toxicity scenario. In pardoned cases, the reasons why someone got reported are usually clear in at least some of the games. I found one case where someone was explicitly reported for post-game chat behavior, case #6580435. But in their 7/0/1 Zed game, they were behaving toxically in-game as well. This person is the closest to the post-game rager, but even for them, reading the game logs is sufficient to show their true colors. The most blameless person I’ve yet found, who was pardoned with an overwhelming majority (case #6612873, if you want to look it up), still calls a teammate bad and starts posting his death count in all chat. I voted to pardon, but this seems more like a guy who had a borderline games than someone who plays blamelessly until the game is over, then turns the toxicity on in after-game.

ThalesMay 3, 20142 votes

(Part 1 of 3)

I'm aware. But it was your thread, so I responded to the topic rather than clutter up an unrelated post of yours. This also accounts for the fact that we may sadly end up drilling down very far once again.

I don't know why you dismiss all the stuff Player Behavior has done. Sure, Crests of Honor are pretty rare these days, but I certainly wouldn't be so quick to write off the honor system as worthless or counterproductive. Most obviously, if it were actually making things worse, it wouldn't stick around. Secondly, through adding avenues of positive feedback, it gets players thinking about good things people are doing, and also boosts the experience when you receive honor at all. I dunno about you, but if I lose a game and have multiple people honoring me, that's still pretty good.

Certainly you can't dismiss Team Builder. True, champion select rarely degenerates into virulent raging, but it often sets the stage for breakdowns later in the game. Surely you can think of all the games where the sentence "I knew I shouldn't have let you mid..." eventually boils over into full-on flamewars. Team Builder prevents all that. In my experience with team builder, the chats in the lobbies have been wholly positive experiences, precisely because of the longer time and removed stress over who plays what where. And that positivity usually carries over into the games, even when someone (usually me, I gotta learn ADC somehow!) ends up feeding. Though I don't have the numbers, I strongly suspect rates of toxicity are substantially lower in Team Builder than in any other form of PvP.

And Player Behavior isn't done with Team Builder yet. There's features it lacks — look in PBE for stuff like something informing players of what roles are most in demand. There's experiments yet to be run with it — look at the current one where they're limiting players under level 10 to only Team Builder. I doubt they would be doing that if Team Builder weren't proving less toxic than regular blind queue. Either way, Player Behavior isn't just sitting on their hands refusing to add pre- and post- game chat to Tribunal. Honor, Team Builder, Behavior Alerts, chat suppressions, and who knows what else they're working on that they have yet to unveil. Like every other group at Riot, they have a lot of things to do.

There's a character limit as well. I have written an essay, haven't I? If it's the scientific approach you want, rest assured, I am thorough. I recommend you save your responses for the third part, just to keep things clean.

ThalesMay 3, 20141 votes

(Part 3 of 3)

Now, this is just what I can tell from my limited vantage point. Unlike the Player Behavior team, I don’t have perfect access to toxicity data. There’s a few potential flaws with my amateur analysis. It could be that players know that post-game chat isn't seen by the Tribunal and therefore don't report people who are abusive only in post-game chat. But I don't think the bulk of the player base understands how the Tribunal works to that level, and even I who do still report people who are fine in game and then explode in after game chat. I admit I didn’t look through all 64 pages of my Tribunal logs, but I still looked at a couple hundred cases, and found only one person who was pardoned while having any evidence that they were flaming in after-game chat, and no one who didn’t cross the line in any of their games.

To recap, if we hypothesize that there are a bunch of players who are only toxic in their after game activity and that the Tribunal is powerless to catch such people, then we ought to Tribunal cases where people are well-behaved in their games and get pardoned. From looking at what ought to be a fairly random sample of some 200 cases, I found no such examples. This strongly suggests that the hypothesis is false. There’s a couple of pardons where adding a post-game chat might more clearly highlight why the person deserves to be punished, but in all those cases, there’s already evidence enough in the game logs to punish. If people already aren’t reading those thoroughly enough, why would adding more to read help? Setting that aside, this is 1% of all Tribunal cases. Even if adding after-game chat logs worked perfectly, it would offer at most a 1% improvement over the Tribunal in its current state. That’s marginal, by any measure.

And that is the whole thing. 1201 words, 200 Tribunal cases.

the Anarchit3chtMay 3, 20142 votes

I don't mean to disrespect you by not writing anything of that magnitude back in response, I actually appreciate that. Merely, it's late. And I confess I don't have as much data as you to back up my claims, so there is little I can say without repeating myself over or providing mere conjecture--a waste of both your and my time.

Let me address your individual pieces, however

1.) I agree with most every point you have here, actually. It was indeed hasty of me to write of Crests of Honor. I thoroughly agree with the idea of positive reinforcement as opposed to negative punishment. I even agree that receiving honor get's players to think about what they did well, and that it encourages them to continue said behavior. That seeing a player with a crest that they too want to receive and then asking how to get that crest will encourage their behavior to fall in line with receiving it. My main problem with that, however, is that the "reward" from it is minimal, highly subjective in value, and that the way that it works provides the actual reward(the crest itself, and not merely the praise associated with receiving honor) to too few a people. If you're someone such as me, you honestly couldn't care less about something as trivial as a "crest" of honor. I know I play "honorable" throughout most of my games. The reward, however, is based entirely upon the backs of the players, which in a way mirrors the Tribunal, so perhaps that is actually the way to go with it. The major difference I see between the two is that Tribunal is impersonal while giving honor is very personal in comparison. I can't say I have much(read: anything) to verify this claim, but players handing out honor is an inconsistent method, again, especially when we compare it to the Tribunal. The only "proof" that I can offer in this regards is that when people play with their friends, they are more likely to give them honor just for the sake of knowing them. Even if that friend behaved poorly. Even if they didn't also give honor to someone else who behaved in the desired manner. This proof might be fleeting, as it itself does not have proof other than anecdotal evidence which is hardly sufficient, but I am willing to bet quite a pretty penny that if I was in some way able to procure the statistics of honor given to friends and honor given to strangers that there would be some agreement to what I am saying. Maybe I'm wrong though, and I'm willing to concede that fact, so you're welcome to choose to disregard this without any ill will upon you.

I agree with everything that you say about Team Builder to a reasonable extent. It most certainly has cut down on toxicity in those regards--at least amongst teammates. What I don't see, however, is the effect on toxicity that it has between opposing players.

2.)Changed my opinion a bit, I'll give you that. It didn't necessarily occur to me to cross-reference matches in that manner. Just because they weren't toxic in that specific game, but only in the post game chat, does not stand to reason that they weren't toxic in other games that presented to them more of a reason to be. That reason either being greater frustration, easier targets, or just all around more in-game interaction between players. So yes, the number probably is lower and I am merely taking my personal experience with the matter into the situation which is causing a bias in my opinion due to my own frustration with the issue.

3.) As this is a recap, there isn't really anything I can address that hasn't been addressed above. I'll end it merely by saying that yes, you are most likely correct in your assertions and I concede in my militant request for post game chat in the Tribunal. It merely comes out of my frustration for what I believe to be still rampant toxicity--and the idea that moving forward, even if it is just an inch, is still better than not moving at all. That idea falls short, however, in the regards that if the resources spent moving forward that inch could be better spent moving forward a mile. With that, you have changed my opinion

the Anarchit3chtMay 3, 20141 votes

Oh, and it appears I wrote much more than even I thought I would. This post probably shouldn't be anywhere near that length, but I tend to have the habit of not stopping once I get rolling. There is little left to discuss, so this is probably off-topic, but nevertheless I find it pertinent, if only a small amount.

While I will concede that post game chat might not be the solution, I definitely think that something else needs to be done to curb toxicity. And that that something else needs to be along the lines of a positive reinforcement tool as opposed to a punishment tool of any kind. I don't know what Riot has in plans for the future, but I could only hope and trust in their ability that they do indeed know what they are doing. Anything else I say beyond this point is mere speculation that will do either of us no good, and with that, I bid you adieu as well as thank you. You took a rational, understanding approach to this subject--even though I myself was being rather snappish and possessed a rather juvenile unwillingness to understand your side; even at my behest that you understand mine.

EDIT: And as a post thought I had, I merely want to correct the lines: "I agree with everything that you say about Team Builder to a reasonable extent. It most certainly has cut down on toxicity in those regards--at least amongst teammates. What I don't see, however, is the effect on toxicity that it has between opposing players." With an addendum that states,

"Although toxicity between opposing players is most certainly less than that of toxicity between allied players due to the fact that that an opposing players actions/etc wouldn't have as much of a negative impact upon you as they would if they were coming from an allied player. Obviously the bad mouthing would be the same, but seeing as how the actions of those players have less of an effect on the outcome of your game due to the fact that they can't try to make you lose because you're on opposite teams, I believe it would only stand to reason that the toxicity in that case is to a lesser extent than from allies."

ThalesMay 4, 20142 votes

I appreciate your response! I'm glad my arguments were read and proved reasonable for being written at 1:00 AM.

I'd say the community behavior has improved over the years I've been playing League, and that's probably in part due to putting a bunch of psychology researchers in charge of it. I'd be interested in seeing where it's going next. You may get your wish of some changes to the Tribunal, as it's been in a strange state recently, in recess more often than not. There may be something brewing with it...

Anyhow, good discussing player behavior with you, and may your teammates and foes alike be pleasant people.

Hyrum GraffMay 12, 20141 votes

Was it the data analysis? That's what did it for me. 200 cases -- phew!

TsiddiqueApr 30, 20141 votes

Whenever that happens, I just take a screen and post it in the report itself by using puush.

the Anarchit3chtApr 30, 20142 votes

That's still not an effective way to handle the situation as a majority of players don't. Or in some instances, such as mine, can't. Any time I attempt to take a screen shot of LoL or the LoL client, it's nothing but a black screen.

Plus that also is automatically assuming that the players doing the Tribunal are going to follow any extraneous links.

TsiddiqueApr 30, 20141 votes

You should be able to take pictures of the LoL client no problem. Also there can't really be any harm done by a picture. Don't know if puu.sh can do anything other than take screenshots of your screen.

xFierySnowMay 1, 20141 votes

You're suppose to be able to take a picture of the LoL Client in post chat oppose to taking a picture of the actual ingame client. You can use the puush software he mentioned or you can check out ShareX. ShareX uploads the image to imgur or some other alternative you can choose from.

In order to take a picture of your ingame client, think the screenshot key is F11 or F12, or if you have the game on window/borderless or even just window, the normal Printscreen button works as well.

MackleDogeApr 30, 20141 votes

I've always wondered the reasoning behind why pre-game and post-game chat aren't included. Never quite understood it and I'm not sure if it is because of the why the logging system works or if it's just feature oversight in the reporting system's development.

RhytoMay 1, 20141 votes

Well, this system was made for the purpose of analyzing the psychological behavior of players in which has already been documented and discussed (Geek Magazine I believe.) I don't see an improvement for the Tribunal whatsoever as there are plenty of projects Riot is working on and it's almost impossible to remove or continue decreasing the amount of toxicity over the facts of a new player, boredom, frustration, attention, etc. It's really just the mood of players and while I would like the Tribunal with more features such as adding your thoughts as to why your punishing the person or pardoning, I just don't see that happening at this time...

JackYAquaMay 1, 20141 votes

+1, from someone who actually does his Tribunal Duty (every now and then ...)

UNST3RBLICHMay 2, 20141 votes

I don't think there's a need for it, considering post game chat in no way effects the game (which at that point would be concluded). Not only that, chances are if someone is being toxic pre-game or post-game, they're going to be toxic -during- the match, in which case just report them after.