Source where I found it: http://kotaku.com/riot-s-punishment-for-ranked-league-of-legends-players-1725646848
Apparently Lyte said that if you have been punished, even by a long low priority queue, they will take away your ranked awards?
It doesn't really affect me, but I'm curious if this is legit or not, seeing that no one has began freaking out about it.
Deep Terror Nami2 votesJust go to his ask.fm page.
Support article is here.
https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/203259670-Ranked-Restrictions#h3q1
nerak231 votesTake another look at the board people are talking about it.
53436278DEL11 votesnot fair i improved my behaviour
dEAdbUs1 votesEveryone is freaking out, I found like 10 topics about that already. This idea is just stupid. Double jeopardy, nuff said.
Jubbinaut1 votesIs it really double jeopardy when it's a known consequence of the initial punishment, though? After all, they did the same thing last year, and mentioned that it represented a shift in policy.
dEAdbUs1 votesI had chat restictions in prev season, but I got my rewards. In prev season they said that worst players won't get rewards. Now Lyte said that every punished player won't get his rewards.
Jubbinaut2 votesSo they expanded on an already-existing policy. I fail to see how that magically makes it double-jeopardy.
dEAdbUs1 votesExpanding = changing = new rules. New punishment for old mistakes? However if we'll look on problem like that its not a double jeopardy, but there is something in human rights, that man cant be punished for old crime if laws changed. Because it's counterproductive.
Jubbinaut1 votesExpanding = changing = new rules.
It's the same rule, with new applications. Nothing more, nothing less.
New punishment for old mistakes?
It's not a new punishment, at least not in the sense that you're intending that. It's a consequence of the old punishment.
However if we'll look on problem like that its not a double jeopardy, but there is something in human rights, that man cant be punished for old crime if laws changed. Because it's counterproductive.
While it's true enough that punishments cannot be issued for crimes that are not illegal at the time they're discovered, it is also true that sentences issued before then may still be enforced.
Even so, it's not a particularly relevant situation, here. The rule - and its rationale - existed almost a year ago.
dEAdbUs1 votesEdited my post, check it out.
