Boards›[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous

The Problem with the Current System

airagog··7 votes·1,726 views

After playing game after game of people who intentionally feed and consist of me telling people to stop intentionally feeding or to go in with the team, I naturally got a mute which made me go "Alright I guess then I'll watch my language." About five days after I was unmuted I was muted yet again despite not swearing, the reason why is a rather broken system that at current rate will kill the league of legends player base. Rather than ranting about why it's broken, I thought of analyzing some of the arguments and why Riot's approach to punishment reform might not be the best choice of reform.

First I want to outline there is a clear distinction between racism and abuse and simply, "What the hell was that?" or "Build this, that item really doesn't work for that champion." And while there is a distinction before anyone gets hyped up and typing about how I'm a terrible person, that's not what is going to be focused on and not why the system is broken, why the system is broken is simple. The cases are NOT looked into.

Chances are you've had someone report you for offensive language, verbal abuse, or negative attitude and chances are 8 times out of 10 it wasn't for a good reason, they were just angry that they lost and as such thought reporting you would get rid of some of that anger. THIS is the problem. This is the wrong approach and why in recent history riot has seen a skyrocketed amount of people banned, muted, or chat restricted. This wouldn't be a huge problem, if not for the fact that since there are a high number of cases, these cases are not reviewed.

Rather, the system seems to be instead of the cases reviewed, the number of cases against you is reviewed. This is the problem. This allows people to abuse the report abuse and which is why you see a huge amount of reports in recent history because no longer can riot and the tribunal afford to review case by case. Instead, people are able to send in blank reports and STILL get people banned/muted. This is the problem and this is what Riot is not wanting to address.

The bottom line is, people are able to abuse the report abuse button, and you get a nice little warning seconds after someone reports you and it's instantly counted and the bottom line is that Riot can no longer afford to do this.

So, now that I have outlined the problem, what is the solution? The simple answer is take away some of the report abuses. Take away offensive language and negative attitude. Instead put in racism. That should be riot's focus on what to punish and reform. Not players getting mad at each other because they refuse to cooperate. That will ALWAYS happen any time you involve other people. What you can control and punish however is racism and extreme profanity. Not talking about maybe 1-6 swears in a game. I mean entire paragraphs of just ugly language.

The other solution that needs to be implemented is liability. Make the players who report other players liable for the report. Make it to where if there's no real reason to report and if they only did it as some sort of juvenile revenge, that they get the punishment instead. So far the responsibility is held entirely on the player who is reported even if they did very minor things that shouldn't be punished because, let's face it, we'll all human. We all make mistakes and sometimes we goof up. But whenever you're afraid to say one "swear" because someone will call riot on you and you'll get muted or banned or afraid to even criticize a player for making a terrible decision repeatedly then there's a problem.

What was started with a tool to help combat trolls and help stop negativity has instead backfired and been used to spread it. If you can't handle all the reports because of negative attitudes or offensive language, maybe then that is a problem we can't focus on.

While some offenders may indeed deserve punishment, it's not worth it if someone innocent gets punished as well.

12 Comments

azrolator2 votes

You mentioned swearing in your post but yet I thought that swearing was not punishable offense but insulting was. I have used swearing. I have not had bans. Maybe I was just lucky. But when I swore I wasn't using it to insult my team either.

Maybe you offer helpful criticism and just say things like 'damn, I thought I was winning that one'. But when I see posts like this I always think of people on my team who starts calling 'noob' and saying things like 'delete this game' to someone who is losing lane hard. The first example contains a swear word while the second is insulting.

Not to say that I report people for one outburst, but I surely will if I have to listen to that crap the entire game. Someone doesn't need to show racism to also show that they completely lack manners. If I see a bunch of complaints backed up with streams to games that show that the player in question wasn't being toxic I will have to consider that riot is muting and banning players unfairly. But if someone truly can't figure out how to treat people decently during a half hour to hour long game then I think they should stop playing games and spend that time figuring out how to be a member of society instead.

airagog1 votes

Offensive language is an entire category of reporting. Under there is where we find the reporting for swearing. Though that is not my main focus, my main focus is "negative attitude". Being pessimistic, while annoying, isn't particularly life changing or offensive unlike 50% of youtube commenters. Yet people seem more than happy to click the negative attitude for people they just don't particularly like.

Perhaps excessive swearing might a problem. Saying the 'f' word every three syllables seems a bit much, but facing a permanent ban seems rather excessive for it. And believe it or not thanks to the wonderful new system I got one verbal restriction then a week ban.

Also, the focus on the article I wrote isn't focusing on behavior that I may have experienced, I openly admitted to perhaps the first time deserving a chat restriction, but a ban for apparently offensive language, not verbal abuse mind you, seems a bit much.

This is what I was entirely afraid of, people focusing on behavior rather than the overall implications of the current system and how liability is entirely placed on the person being reported, innocent or guilty and the person doing the reporting is always correct. This is the rather important topic I feel we need to discuss rather than worrying about behavior in general. Because, let's face it, people are pricks the second you take away any accountability from them.

Can we please stop focusing on "people who are reported are bad and that's that." And move on to, "Perhaps this, much like the American Judicial System, needs a new approach that maybe we aren't entirely getting." Overall that sounds like a much better conversation and much more productive one.

airagog1 votes

There's my Tl;Dr post. Yay. Tried to make it well thought out, sorry if I rambled. It made sense in my head.

linkmastr0011 votes

I'm going to try responding to each bit to organize my thoughts clearly.

After playing game after game of people who intentionally feed and consist of me telling people to stop intentionally feeding or to go in with the team, I naturally got a mute which made me go "Alright I guess then I'll watch my language." About five days after I was unmuted I was muted yet again despite not swearing, the reason why is a rather broken system that at current rate will kill the league of legends player base. Rather than ranting about why it's broken, I thought of analyzing some of the arguments and why Riot's approach to punishment reform might not be the best choice of reform.

First I want to outline there is a clear distinction between racism and abuse and simply, "What the hell was that?" or "Build this, that item really doesn't work for that champion." And while there is a distinction before anyone gets hyped up and typing about how I'm a terrible person, that's not what is going to be focused on and not why the system is broken, why the system is broken is simple. The cases are NOT looked into.

Chances are you've had someone report you for offensive language, verbal abuse, or negative attitude and chances are 8 times out of 10 it wasn't for a good reason, they were just angry that they lost and as such thought reporting you would get rid of some of that anger. THIS is the problem. This is the wrong approach and why in recent history riot has seen a skyrocketed amount of people banned, muted, or chat restricted. This wouldn't be a huge problem, if not for the fact that since there are a high number of cases, these cases are not reviewed.

Rather, the system seems to be instead of the cases reviewed, the number of cases against you is reviewed. This is the problem. This allows people to abuse the report abuse and which is why you see a huge amount of reports in recent history because no longer can riot and the tribunal afford to review case by case. Instead, people are able to send in blank reports and STILL get people banned/muted. This is the problem and this is what Riot is not wanting to address.

The bottom line is, people are able to abuse the report abuse button, and you get a nice little warning seconds after someone reports you and it's instantly counted and the bottom line is that Riot can no longer afford to do this.

I'd be shocked if they evaluate solely on the number of cases received for a person. I've seen a dozens upon dozens of threads where people have challenged Lyte to prove that they were abusive, and only once have I seen a case of a someone being falsely charged with a Chat restriction(I assume that's what you mean when you say you got muted). While I do agree that "What the hell was that?" or "Build this, that item really doesn't work for that champion." are not abuse in any sense, saying it aggressively or constantly repeated it can be construed as such. If you find yourself reported for trying to offer advice, perhaps you need to rethink how you're saying it? Just to be clear here, I don't think you're a bad person at all. The way you talk in this post doesn't make me think that at all, maybe you just communicate too aggressively with your team?

Also, about the reporting thing where 8 times out of 10 it wasn't for a good reason, I don't believe that to be the case. I know when ever I use that, I feel as though I was honestly offended. Have I lost games, due to others? Sure, but I never report the player for that. Have I lost games due to others and reported someone? Yes, I report players that are abusing my teammates for playing badly. Everyone has those days where they just can't think straight and play, I know I have. I will only report people if I honestly think it's necessary.

So, now that I have outlined the problem, what is the solution? The simple answer is take away some of the report abuses. Take away offensive language and negative attitude. Instead put in racism. That should be riot's focus on what to punish and reform. Not players getting mad at each other because they refuse to cooperate. That will ALWAYS happen any time you involve other people. What you can control and punish however is racism and extreme profanity. Not talking about maybe 1-6 swears in a game. I mean entire paragraphs of just ugly language.

I disagree with this completely. Using profanity is not the same as abuse. You can be offensive without using profanity just as easily as you can be positive while using profanity. Also, I've had plenty of time I've had negative games where I felt abused that had nothing whatsoever to do with racism. Am I not allowed to report them just because they weren't racist? I don't mind losing games and I love to win them, but I hate it when players decide to berate me or any of my other teammates or opponents because it ruins my experience. Am I not allowed to report them when they don't get act in one of the most extremely negative behaviors (racism)?

The other solution that needs to be implemented is liability. Make the players who report other players liable for the report. Make it to where if there's no real reason to report and if they only did it as some sort of juvenile revenge, that they get the punishment instead. So far the responsibility is held entirely on the player who is reported even if they did very minor things that shouldn't be punished because, let's face it, we'll all human. We all make mistakes and sometimes we goof up. But whenever you're afraid to say one "swear" because someone will call riot on you and you'll get muted or banned or afraid to even criticize a player for making a terrible decision repeatedly then there's a problem.

What was started with a tool to help combat trolls and help stop negativity has instead backfired and been used to spread it. If you can't handle all the reports because of negative attitudes or offensive language, maybe then that is a problem we can't focus on.

While some offenders may indeed deserve punishment, it's not worth it if someone innocent gets punished as well.

Honestly, I don't feel people abuse the system. I'm going to direct you to Lyte's post here: http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/miscellaneous/l3wHwtIl-rewards-for-positive-play Basically, he mentions that 95% of players have never recieved a punishment of any kind. If people were abusing the system as you claim, I believe the numbers would be much higher. I've had games where I felt there has been one player who cost us the entire game by making many, many mistakes. Never have I reported that player just to "spite" them because they cost me a win (That's not to say I haven't reported some for trolling that I felt were honestly trolling). If players were constantly reporting that "one" player, I'm sure that 95% would be much lower.

I know I've played some games where I was awful. I'm only human after all, but if what you're saying is true, I believe I would have encountered some kind of ban/punishment at some point during my time playing League, and I never have.

airagog1 votes

Ah good! opposition! And the most common objections and oppositions that people have. Excellent.

I'd be shocked if they evaluate solely on the number of cases received for a person. I've seen a dozens upon dozens of threads where people have challenged Lyte to prove that they were abusive, and only once have I seen a case of a someone being falsely charged with a Chat restriction(I assume that's what you mean when you say you got muted). While I do agree that "What the hell was that?" or "Build this, that item really doesn't work for that champion." are not abuse in any sense, saying it aggressively or constantly repeated it can be construed as such. If you find yourself reported for trying to offer advice, perhaps you need to rethink how you're saying it? Just to be clear here, I don't think you're a bad person at all. The way you talk in this post doesn't make me think that at all, maybe you just communicate too aggressively with your team?

Well then prepare to be shocked, as punishments are distributed rather quickly, far too quickly for the tribunal to have even remotely reviewed the case. I am speaking of mere hours. Also you are instantly given a warning and popup when someone reports you regardless.

Also, about the reporting thing where 8 times out of 10 it wasn't for a good reason, I don't believe that to be the case. I know when ever I use that, I feel as though I was honestly offended. Have I lost games, due to others? Sure, but I never report the player for that. Have I lost games due to others and reported someone? Yes, I report players that are abusing my teammates for playing badly. Everyone has those days where they just can't think straight and play, I know I have. I will only report people if I honestly think it's necessary.

ABOUT THAT. So I was playing today. I JUST played my first game today. Evidence 1 happened. Keep in mind, this was my FIRST game. I wasn't even LOOKING or trying, this just naturally happened on my very first game.

Back story on this: Yi was currently 0/4 He finished the game 4/6/5. Yi CLEARLY was not trolling and still got reported. Why? Spite. This is NOT an anomaly. That's the really sad part, it's not. You may claim to have never seen anyone abuse this, I would wager that you're not telling the entire truth, or forgetting.

I disagree with this completely. Using profanity is not the same as abuse. You can be offensive without using profanity just as easily as you can be positive while using profanity. Also, I've had plenty of time I've had negative games where I felt abused that had nothing whatsoever to do with racism. Am I not allowed to report them just because they weren't racist? I don't mind losing games and I love to win them, but I hate it when players decide to berate me or any of my other teammates or opponents because it ruins my experience. Am I not allowed to report them when they don't get act in one of the most extremely negative behaviors (racism)?

Thank you for this specific objection as it is one that I have frequently heard and it is with great love I say:

No no no no no. No, stop. You cannot ever say because it ruins my experience in regards to another player that is not: Feeding. AFK.

Why? Because this is ENTIRELY too subjective. The argument could easily be made that you were ruining their experience, it's entirely too easy to say someone "ruins your experience" when in reality if it truly was that ruinous or that earth shattering there's a mute button. You can't say that it ruined the game because while it may be annoying or inconvenient, so long as they are doing fine then they aren't ruining your experience, they're inconveniencing you at most. They could easily make the argument, "Well of course I was mad, he was ruining my experience by not doing well and therefore cost us the game and a large chunk of my time."

Rules cannot be subjective, they must be objective, otherwise you run into a plethora of problems.

Honestly, I don't feel people abuse the system. I'm going to direct you to Lyte's post here: http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/miscellaneous/l3wHwtIl-rewards-for-positive-play Basically, he mentions that 95% of players have never recieved a punishment of any kind. If people were abusing the system as you claim, I believe the numbers would be much higher. I've had games where I felt there has been one player who cost us the entire game by making many, many mistakes. Never have I reported that player just to "spite" them because they cost me a win (That's not to say I haven't reported some for trolling that I felt were honestly trolling). If players were constantly reporting that "one" player, I'm sure that 95% would be much lower.

I know I've played some games where I was awful. I'm only human after all, but if what you're saying is true, I believe I would have encountered some kind of ban/punishment at some point during my time playing League, and I never have.

95% is misleading. Why? This is the ENTIRETY of the player base, active and inactive, (and there are millions of inactive accounts). Also this does account for the people who simply don't talk or communicate with others. We always have a couple of people on each time who never communicate or chat, it's just that they don't do it. Also factor in those who don't play with public people on their team, instead preferring friends or premade teams. What we have to look at to decide on what percentage is we have to look at players who are:

A. Social B. Play public games frequently. C. lower to lower-middle ELO. (That's where the most toxic players are)

When we narrow these down, suddenly we have a much smaller scope and therefore a larger percentage of people who have been punished, unfortunately Riot can't exactly look at these and therefore we can't get an adjusted number.

Trinityunicorn2 votes

Back story on this: Yi was currently 0/4 He finished the game 4/6/5. Yi CLEARLY was not trolling and still got reported. Why? Spite. This is NOT an anomaly. That's the really sad part, it's not. You may claim to have never seen anyone abuse this, I would wager that you're not telling the entire truth, or forgetting.

I can't tell that yi got reported, I can tell that someone threatened to do so. I also know that threat is a reportable offense. That is toxic. If yi doesn't have a bunch of reports stacked up on him, he has nothing to worry about. I would also say that there is a good chance that yi didn't get reported as people that do lots of threatening often do not follow through especially if they themselves are doing something wrong because they don't want to call attention to themselves. And if reports are weighted then there is a good possibility that even if they did report him, that they've racked up so many false reports the system ignores them.

It could get yi into trouble if he has a lot of reports racked up for other things though.

airagog1 votes

The problem is you can have a lot of threats and reports stacked up against you for no real reason with the current system. The bottom line is, there is no punishment for reporting someone for offensive language or verbal abuse or negative attitude and as such people don't have to be held accountable. The second you take accountability for one's actions away, you get major problems.

Trinityunicorn1 votes

The problem is you can have a lot of threats and reports stacked up against you for no real reason with the current system. The bottom line is, there is no punishment for reporting someone for offensive language or verbal abuse or negative attitude and as such people don't have to be held accountable. The second you take accountability for one's actions away, you get major problems.

I don't know if that is THE PROBLEM or not. There is a negating of the weight of a falsely filed report. I don't know what the checks and balances are for determining that. The accounting is if you're misusing the system the system stops valuing your opinion.

You wrote:

Chances are you've had someone report you for offensive language, verbal abuse, or negative attitude and chances are 8 times out of 10 it wasn't for a good reason,

I just don't think that this is problem for most people, I don't think most people are reported for offensive language. I can say that the chances of someone reporting me for offensive language, verbal abuse or negative attitude are pretty slim, I rarely talk in chat at all.

I think you make some big leaps to get to your conclusions about the system. I've been watching since the smites started happening and what I see is that the system might need some tweaking but that its been accurate. They evidently have been tightening the screws even more, but we don't have that info available to us. If anything the problem that I see with the system is only that once a player gets flagged, it becomes very difficult for them to get back to normal, and THEN false reports hurt them.

You got caught up in the system, and false reports may be affecting you, I'll give you that because I don't know and it appears to me that some people are changing, but its not fast enough. The additional restrictions are supposed to be feedback for the player that more change needs to happen. So while I think the system needs a better way of a player working their way back to normal status, I don't think the system needs to be done away with. It doesn't seem to be restricting people that don't need it in some way initially.

The actual problems lay within the beliefs systems of the players getting into trouble, the system is addressing the symptoms of that. Its like if you have a headache and you take an aspirin. That doesn't solve why you're having headaches, it does address the pain that you are experiencing while having one.

Jubbinaut1 votes

Well then prepare to be shocked, as punishments are distributed rather quickly, far too quickly for the tribunal to have even remotely reviewed the case. I am speaking of mere hours. Also you are instantly given a warning and popup when someone reports you regardless.

It's true that they're issued too quickly for the Tribunal to have reviewed the case. That's because Tribunal is down right now, and the reviews are being handled in-house. They've stated that chat restriction reviews are being handled by sophisticated chat-detection software, and that many of those are being re-reviewed by a Rioter to ensure accuracy of the system (not unlike random testing in batches of condoms).

Additionally, the in-client pop-up warning is not issued for each report. Rather, it triggers based on "spikes" in reports against you. It's also designed to show up some unknown amount of time/games after the triggering report, specifically to obfuscate who issued that report.

ABOUT THAT. So I was playing today. I JUST played my first game today. Evidence 1 happened. Keep in mind, this was my FIRST game. I wasn't even LOOKING or trying, this just naturally happened on my very first game.

Back story on this: Yi was currently 0/4 He finished the game 4/6/5. Yi CLEARLY was not trolling and still got reported. Why? Spite. This is NOT an anomaly. That's the really sad part, it's not. You may claim to have never seen anyone abuse this, I would wager that you're not telling the entire truth, or forgetting.

A) How do you know Yi was reported? Is it because someone threatened to report him? Often-times toxic players will use threats of reports to get people to act the way they want, but Lyte has stated (and my own experiences tend to back it up) that they don't usually follow up on those threats.

B) Can you be certain that report mattered? Reports are weighted based on the reporting history of the player issuing them. Thus, players who habitually issue false reports have extremely low weight to their reports, and have little to no impact on whether a case is built against another player.

Thank you for this specific objection as it is one that I have frequently heard and it is with great love I say:

No no no no no. No, stop. You cannot ever say because it ruins my experience in regards to another player that is not: Feeding. AFK.

Why? Because this is ENTIRELY too subjective. The argument could easily be made that you were ruining their experience, it's entirely too easy to say someone "ruins your experience" when in reality if it truly was that ruinous or that earth shattering there's a mute button. You can't say that it ruined the game because while it may be annoying or inconvenient, so long as they are doing fine then they aren't ruining your experience, they're inconveniencing you at most. They could easily make the argument, "Well of course I was mad, he was ruining my experience by not doing well and therefore cost us the game and a large chunk of my time."

By the time you feel the need to mute someone, the damage has been done. That's why the report system exists alongside the mute button.

95% is misleading. Why? This is the ENTIRETY of the player base, active and inactive, (and there are millions of inactive accounts). Also this does account for the people who simply don't talk or communicate with others. We always have a couple of people on each time who never communicate or chat, it's just that they don't do it. Also factor in those who don't play with public people on their team, instead preferring friends or premade teams. What we have to look at to decide on what percentage is we have to look at players who are:

Your claim here contradicts Lyte's previous statements. Not only does the 95% statistic not include inactive accounts, it also - in large part, at least - does account for smurfs. Turns out that Riot's actually pretty good at detecting and identifying smurf accounts.

As for accounting for players who don't talk, that's a perfectly acceptable and reasonable way to play. It's flat neutrality. Discounting the neutral players simply because they're neutral seems an incredibly disingenuous way to offer data.

When we narrow these down, suddenly we have a much smaller scope and therefore a larger percentage of people who have been punished, unfortunately Riot can't exactly look at these and therefore we can't get an adjusted number.

Doing what you suggest here is adjusting the data to fit your claims. It would be relevant for only an incredibly specific subset of the overall player-base, which would make it less than useless overall.

In the words of Sherlock Holmes (with my applied emphasis):

It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.

airagog1 votes

{quoted} It's true that they're issued too quickly for the Tribunal to have reviewed the case. That's because Tribunal is down right now, and the reviews are being handled in-house. They've stated that chat restriction reviews are being handled by sophisticated chat-detection software, and that many of those are being re-reviewed by a Rioter to ensure accuracy of the system (not unlike random testing in batches of condoms.

That doesn't work, that's a bad system that we need to go based on automatic detection due to the sheer number of reports coming in, that's a sign that the system is broken. Having the sheer number of reports go through by a riot employee is madness. Expecting a rather large amount of reports going in and being handled by a couple hundred people on the world's most popular game is looney and doesn't work. In fact my entire point of why this doesn't work which you seem to have pointed out that this doesn't work several times in your rebuttal.

A) How do you know Yi was reported? Is it because someone threatened to report him? Often-times toxic players will use threats of reports to get people to act the way they want, but Lyte has stated (and my own experiences tend to back it up) that they don't usually follow up on those threats.

B) Can you be certain that report mattered? Reports are weighted based on the reporting history of the player issuing them. Thus, players who habitually issue false reports have extremely low weight to their reports, and have little to no impact on whether a case is built against another player.

A) I only have word of mouth, to be honest. And quite frankly it's to show that the attitude is there and constant, whether he was actually reported is irrelevant. What does matter is that the attitude and the no fear of false reporting, which is what I am trying to highlight, is there.

B) So there are people who habitually issue false reports and that though these do indeed have low weight, still do have a weight to them and indeed the players who constantly issue false reports don't have any repercussions. It's almost like you took what I said from my initial argument and reworded it.

By the time you feel the need to mute someone, the damage has been done. That's why the report system exists alongside the mute button.

Your claim here contradicts Lyte's previous statements. Not only does the 95% statistic not include inactive accounts, it also - in large part, at least - does account for smurfs. Turns out that Riot's actually pretty good at detecting and identifying smurf accounts.

He says active players, that does include smurf accounts and does include accounts who simply don't talk as well. We can't focus on these because reform doesn't affect these accounts. Reform only affects accounts that have been punished or that are facing punishment.

As for accounting for players who don't talk, that's a perfectly acceptable and reasonable way to play. It's flat neutrality. Discounting the neutral players simply because they're neutral seems an incredibly disingenuous way to offer data.

No, that's simply discrediting the control group that is not affected by the experiment or statistic. It's like testing what the most popular flavor of peanut butter is among a group of people who are deathly allergic to nuts. It simply doesn't many any sense.

Doing what you suggest here is adjusting the data to fit your claims. It would be relevant for only an incredibly specific subset of the overall player-base, which would make it less than useless overall.

No, we can't focus on those players because quite frankly reforming the current tribunal system doesn't affect them, instead we need to focus on the players it DOES affect. You've successfully missed the entire point of my first and second argument. And I would like to have a good discussion and debate over this without any sort of Ad Hominem fallacy which is what most of the posts thus far have been. Apparently that is far too much to ask for.

Please, before you construct a counter argument, review the logical fallacies and understand that what you are accusing me of is what you yourself are doing.

Jubbinaut1 votes

{quoted} That doesn't work, that's a bad system that we need to go based on automatic detection due to the sheer number of reports coming in, that's a sign that the system is broken. Having the sheer number of reports go through by a riot employee is madness. Expecting a rather large amount of reports going in and being handled by a couple hundred people on the world's most popular game is looney and doesn't work. In fact my entire point of why this doesn't work which you seem to have pointed out that this doesn't work several times in your rebuttal.

The problem with your assumption here, is that Rioters aren't reviewing every single report that gets issued. That would be insane, and entirely unworkable.

Rather, the report system builds cases, based on the number of reported games (previously, it took 12-25% of reported games for a case to be triggered). Those cases are then reviewed by the various systems that handle them (both the chat detection system and the spot reviews by individual Rioters).

If I am still misunderstanding what you're trying to say here, I beg your forgiveness. I tried my best to parse out your meaning in the above paragraph, but I can't shake the impression that I missed something key.

A) I only have word of mouth, to be honest. And quite frankly it's to show that the attitude is there and constant, whether he was actually reported is irrelevant. What does matter is that the attitude and the no fear of false reporting, which is what I am trying to highlight, is there.

Perhaps it is, but that doesn't speak much to the actual functions of the system. People may be afraid of false reports, but that doesn't mean they have any real reason to be. By the same token, people may make false reports, but that doesn't mean those reports mean anything.

B) So there are people who habitually issue false reports and that though these do indeed have low weight, still do have a weight to them and indeed the players who constantly issue false reports don't have any repercussions. It's almost like you took what I said from my initial argument and reworded it.

It's very possible for a player's report weight to drop to zero. In addition, Riot has issued multiple ban waves targeting players who abuse the report system in the way you indicate. The likelihood of a case being built against a player purely due to false reports is extremely low, and the systems for reviewing those cases are extremely likely to pardon the case.

(NOTE: I am defining false reports as reports issued for games in which no toxicity is present)

He says active players, that does include smurf accounts and does include accounts who simply don't talk as well. We can't focus on these because reform doesn't affect these accounts. Reform only affects accounts that have been punished or that are facing punishment.

When the stated statistic is intended to cover the entire player-base, one must include the entire player-base. If Lyte were flatly comparing the number of players deemed "toxic" to the number of players deemed "positive," that would be a different story. But his statement was that 95% of the playerbase did not receive any form of behavioral sanction this season.

However, we can examine some numbers that fit your criteria. In his MIT talk last year, Lyte noted that by their judgement, when breaking the playerbase down by toxicity levels, the four basic groups fall like so:

  • 1% - Toxic players
  • 7% - "Bad" players
  • 14% - Neutral players
  • 78% - Good players.

I think we can agree that the players who don't use chat fall neatly into the Neutral category. I'm not sure how you'd like to compare that data, so I'll simply leave it as-is.

No, that's simply discrediting the control group that is not affected by the experiment or statistic. It's like testing what the most popular flavor of peanut butter is among a group of people who are deathly allergic to nuts. It simply doesn't many any sense.

Again, when one is attempting to speak about the entire player-base, one should be sure that their statistics relate to the entire player-base.

Beyond that concern, however, it's notable that there are forms of toxicity beyond those seen in chat (intentional feeding/griefing, ragequits, emote spam, and ping spam, for example). Discounting the players who elect not to use chat also ignores these forms of toxicity.

No, we can't focus on those players because quite frankly reforming the current tribunal system doesn't affect them, instead we need to focus on the players it DOES affect.

I don't think I can address this, because I don't understand what you're referring to. It doesn't seem to relate to the quote it appears to be in response to. Would you mind clarifying?

You've successfully missed the entire point of my first and second argument. And I would like to have a good discussion and debate over this without any sort of Ad Hominem fallacy which is what most of the posts thus far have been. Apparently that is far too much to ask for.

... If there's something in my post that you view as a direct attack on you, I'd appreciate it if you'd take the time to address it - and what it is - specifically, rather than simply making blank accusations of this sort. I intended my statements to speak of your arguments, rather than of you, and in re-reading, I don't see where I have failed that goal.

Although I suppose the quote, which I intended to be mildly humorous, was a bit much. My apologies for how that may have come across.

airagog1 votes

I would like there not to be so much a focus on player behavior on the person being reported, God knows I'm getting plenty of those replies, instead I would like to focus on the aspect of the system itself and how it lacks accountability for the person doing reporting.

More from [ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous

Open Letter to Parents of League of Legends Players
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous860 comments
2,611
votes
Rewards for positive play
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous19,712 comments
1,337
votes
I don't like Boards
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous324 comments
809
votes
STOP ALLOWING LEVEL 1 ACCOUNTS TO SEND FRIEND REQUESTS!!!
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous291 comments
679
votes
Wanting to do something special for an awesome friend. Riot, please help? <3
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous220 comments
614
votes
People that are telling others to kill themselves has to stop! Please help me get this noticed!
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous605 comments
600
votes