Use the "player you reported has been punished" popup every time please

InsaneSamurai·Jul 26, 2015·5 votes·1,171 views

If you just randomly pop it up, and rarely at that, it makes people think their reports don't do anything at all.

I am almost completely convinced that all my reports are ignored because of this. If you told me every time someone was punished, then I would at least have some sort of indication that there is actually a reason to use the report feature other than the raging trolls that use it to grief people harder.

Gotta love the downvote box... i mean the forums.

Just another example of how trolls control the game I guess, they also group censor posts.

17 Comments

Deep Terror NamiJul 26, 20152 votes

Just browse the forums. You'll see banned players rage all the time, and that lets you know it works :3

InsaneSamuraiJul 26, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Valkyrie Witch,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=zd1aywbh,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-07-26T10:53:26.114+0000)

Just browse the forums. You'll see banned players rage all the time, and that lets you know it works :3

I know that sometimes, under some unknown circumstances, reports actually matter.

I do not, however, know that my reports have ever done anything despite the amazing cesspool of players I have to deal with.

It never gets better, and that's more of an overall Riot problem than anything else, but if while I was seeing zero improvement in the community I was also getting messages that my reports actually did something, I wouldn't feel like it was so hopeless.

EL HAMSTEROJul 26, 20151 votes

ive gotten the notification that the player I reported has been punished twice.

and both times I was trolling the hell out of them to make them rage hahahahahah

InsaneSamuraiJul 26, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=EL HAMSTERO,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=zd1aywbh,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2015-07-26T16:39:48.998+0000)

ive gotten the notification that the player I reported has been punished twice.

and both times I was trolling the hell out of them to make them rage hahahahahah

Here's the system working it's magic.

PupelJul 26, 20152 votes

Have you ever used Unskilled or intentional feeding as one of you categories? I think that's how They weed out the toxic haters who try and abuse the system. dont know about you but I never EVER heard of anyone banned for feeding.

JubbinautJul 26, 20151 votes

I have. Multiple times. There's even a new system they're building in to automatically detect intentional feeding.

Unskilled, however, is not a punishable report.

InsaneSamuraiJul 26, 20151 votes

{quoted}

I have. Multiple times. There's even a new system they're building in to automatically detect intentional feeding.

Unskilled, however, is not a punishable report.

Why do you people automatically assume I'm only reporting people as unskilled?

Did you even read my post?

Even if I was doing that, how could that possibly warrant any punishment?

JubbinautJul 26, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Why do you people automatically assume I'm only reporting people as unskilled?

I made no such assumption. My reference to unskilled was purely because the person I responded to (Pupel) had stated:

"Have you ever used Unskilled or intentional feeding as one of you categories?"

Did you even read my post?

Yes, but that particular response wasn't to you. It was to Pupel. If that was unclear, I apologize.

Even if I was doing that, how could that possibly warrant any punishment?

It couldn't. That's why I stated that it's not a punishable report.

InsaneSamuraiJul 26, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Have you ever used Unskilled or intentional feeding as one of you categories? I think that's how They weed out the toxic haters who try and abuse the system. dont know about you but I never EVER heard of anyone banned for feeding.

I'm talking about blatant toxicity and griefing, those are entirely different things.

EndlessSorcererJul 26, 20152 votes

You have to consider that you are placed in Bronze 1. You are likely primarily playing with players from Bronze 3 to Silver 4, which accounts for a very large portion of the playerbase. Even if players you reported haven't been punished, there are so many players around your rank that you are highly unlikely to be matched with them again (unless you both queue up at the same time, such as immediately after a game).

One tip I've found: if someone on the other team dodged a game during champion select, don't queue up again for about a minute. They likely dodged due to a trolling playing on their team and this can help you avoid being matched with that particular player.

InsaneSamuraiJul 26, 20151 votes

{quoted}

You have to consider that you are placed in Bronze 1. You are likely primarily playing with players from Bronze 3 to Silver 4, which accounts for a very large portion of the playerbase. Even if players you reported haven't been punished, there are so many players around your rank that you are highly unlikely to be matched with them again (unless you both queue up at the same time, such as immediately after a game).

One tip I've found: if someone on the other team dodged a game during champion select, don't queue up again for about a minute. They likely dodged due to a trolling playing on their team and this can help you avoid being matched with that particular player.

Yeah I think it's extremely safe to assume that every time someone says decline, there was a troll and a dodge previously. It really is that common, and that is sad. Even doing this I still get vastly more games with trolls than not.

JubbinautJul 26, 20151 votes

The new report feedback system is brand new. It's only been out for around a month.
It's currently configured to only show for players whose reports trigger a case - this is due to concerns regarding the potential "spamminess" of the system.
They've discussed opening that out to show feedback for more players, depending on how these early tests play out regarding the pop-up spam.

All of that aside, reports matter. If your report is genuinely valid (that is to say, the player you reported was actually demonstrating toxic behavior in the match you reported them in), it matters.

InsaneSamuraiJul 26, 20151 votes

{quoted}

The new report feedback system is brand new. It's only been out for around a month.

It's currently configured to only show for players whose reports trigger a case - this is due to concerns regarding the potential "spamminess" of the system.

They've discussed opening that out to show feedback for more players, depending on how these early tests play out regarding the pop-up spam.

All of that aside, reports matter. If your report is genuinely valid (that is to say, the player you reported was actually demonstrating toxic behavior in the match you reported them in), it matters.

Yeah I doubt it. I've been reporting abusive players for years and I have never seen any improvement that didn't go away within a couple of days.

JubbinautJul 26, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Yeah I doubt it. I've been reporting abusive players for years and I have never seen any improvement that didn't go away within a couple of days.

You're welcome to believe that - your experiences would seem to support it. The larger data, however, indicates some very interesting explanations for that experience. Here's a quick version of it.

Players can be grouped according to their "normal" toxicity level into 4 basic groups:

"Toxic" - defined as the most consistently toxic players, they represent the smallest group, making up <5% of the player base.
"Bad" - defined as regularly toxic players, they represent some ~15% of the playerbase.
"Neutral" - the quiet or "clinical" players.
"Good" - the consistently positive players. Between them, the neutral and good players represent ~77-80% of the playerbase.

While one would expect to see most toxicity from the "Toxic" players, it turns out that the vast majority (~78%) of the toxicity players see actually comes from the "Good" and "Neutral" camps. In other words, most of the time you see a player being toxic in a game, they aren't being toxic very often.

InsaneSamuraiJul 26, 20152 votes

{quoted}

You're welcome to believe that - your experiences would seem to support it. The larger data, however, indicates some very interesting explanations for that experience. Here's a quick version of it.

Players can be grouped according to their "normal" toxicity level into 4 basic groups:

"Toxic" - defined as the most consistently toxic players, they represent the smallest group, making up <5% of the player base.

"Bad" - defined as regularly toxic players, they represent some ~15% of the playerbase.

"Neutral" - the quiet or "clinical" players.

"Good" - the consistently positive players. Between them, the neutral and good players represent ~77-80% of the playerbase.

While one would expect to see most toxicity from the "Toxic" players, it turns out that the vast majority (~78%) of the toxicity players see actually comes from the "Good" and "Neutral" camps. In other words, most of the time you see a player being toxic in a game, they aren't being toxic very often.

As for the previous post, I did get the responses mixed up and I'm sorry about that. On these statistics, do they come from Riot, or Lyte? All I ever see him do is use the statistics of how little they actually punish people and try and politically spin that into a good thing saying that those are the only problem players.

For example, In the past 12 ranked games I played, 10 of them had people who were so toxic that they completely refused to do anything besides run around on their own and argue with their own team. That or intentionally feeding, griefing, or just plain old afk-ing. 10 out of 12 games with basically automatic losses because it was a 4v5 in one way or another, One of the two games that I didn't have any griefers or trolls, the enemy team had one who was quite obviously intentionally throwing the game from the start. So, that's one game out of a dozen where the actual gameplay, team comps, cooperation actually mattered.

Sure this is a relatively small sample size, and it's usually not quite THAT common from my previous experiences, but it's also usually not very much better than this. Wouldn't it be nice if they actually spent some serious effort in making the community a better place instead of rehashing the same old excuses over and over again? Could you imagine if that one game out of twelve was the only one that was ruined by griefers or trolls? Doesn't that seem like what a game like this should be?

JubbinautJul 27, 20151 votes

{quoted}

As for the previous post, I did get the responses mixed up and I'm sorry about that. On these statistics, do they come from Riot, or Lyte? All I ever see him do is use the statistics of how little they actually punish people and try and politically spin that into a good thing saying that those are the only problem players.

I was at work when I posted that, and couldn't look up the specific numbers. So they were the estimates I remembered from this talk given by Lyte and StatusKwoh at MIT. The link should drop you at just shy of the 5-minute mark, where he actually talks about these numbers. But, since I have the video in front of me now, I'm gonna go ahead and correct my numbers from above:

Behavioral Profile Representation (by type of player)

"Toxic" - 1%
"Bad" - 7%
"Neutral" - 14%
"Good" - 78%

Toxicity Representation (by type of player)

"Toxic" - 5% (significantly high for relative number of players, but still surprisingly low)
"Bad" - 8% (again high for relative number of players)
"Neutral" - 10% (significantly low for relative number of players)
"Good" - 77% (low for relative number of players, but shockingly high)

It could be argued that the metrics used to measure the Behavioral Profile Representation might be skewed, but that still wouldn't make a meaningful difference to what the combined data shows. Most of the toxicity we see comes from players who are not commonly toxic.

I highly recommend watching the video, as it's full of really fascinating information.

Sure this is a relatively small sample size, and it's usually not quite THAT common from my previous experiences, but it's also usually not very much better than this. Wouldn't it be nice if they actually spent some serious effort in making the community a better place instead of rehashing the same old excuses over and over again? Could you imagine if that one game out of twelve was the only one that was ruined by griefers or trolls? Doesn't that seem like what a game like this should be?

The thing is, your entire experience is a small sample size. When that video above was made in 2013, Riot was measuring 20 million unique data sets per day.

Now, that's not to devalue your experiences - merely to indicate the relatively high likelihood that they're actually pretty unusual. I imagine mine are as well, as I only see toxicity in 1 out of every 30 or so games.