Do you believe that permanent bans is the solution for toxicity? part 2 votepoll works now
Follow-up question:
Have you ever been banned?
-Dddddddddank 1
















































































































































































Follow-up question:
Have you ever been banned?
-Dddddddddank 1
















































































































































































Until RIOT starts banning trolls, AFK's and feeders on a more regular basis then no it's not a solution because a lot of the toxicity is cause by the aforementioned problems. That is how ignorant RIOT is.
I've mentioned that so many times, but unfortunately, the community agrees with Riot that chat related offenses are much worse than actually ruining the game.
[{quoted}](name=The Big Piece,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=A23oOqNy,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2016-08-03T19:56:31.861+0000)
I've mentioned that so many times, but unfortunately, the community agrees with Riot that chat related offenses are much worse than actually ruining the game.
Like I said, RIOT is ignorant.
Maybe they can't do it to the feeders and trolls because of the proof factor but there is something in place for the AFK's. It should also follow the same path as chat bans but using bans to bots first then a 14 day ban and then a perma ban but as said many times, RIOT is ignorant because LPQ is dumb AF.
I honestly believe permanent bans of players will hurt them in the long run.. But as long they feed everyone the same stuff they've been told everyone so far 'we're here for you guys' nothing will change. That makes me ask myself, how though? When certain players are getting exemptions of certain behavior that is not tolerated in the rulebook.. *coughMeteos
I believe if you're 'toxic' in the game the correct punishment should be permanent chat restricted but a considerably majority of players seem to think that chattin sh*t is worse then feeding intentionally or throwing certain games and I haven't even brought up players that intentionally are Deranking accounts ...
-Dddddddddddank1
























































I honestly believe permanent bans of players will hurt them in the long run.. But as long they feed everyone the same stuff they've been told everyone so far 'we're here for you guys' nothing will change. That makes me ask myself, how though? When certain players are getting exemptions of certain behavior that is not tolerated in the rulebook.. *coughMeteos
I believe if you're 'toxic' in the game the correct punishment should be permanent chat restricted but a considerably majority of players seem to think that chattin sh*t is worse then feeding intentionally or throwing certain games and I haven't even brought up players that intentionally are Deranking accounts ...
Can you please provide a link about the not banning feeders and afks thing?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQoRVokGc8E A special link just for you babyyyy
What feeders and afk thing are you talking about? We're talking bout the intentional feeding and Derank account players.
-Dddddddddddddank1














https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQoRVokGc8E A special link just for you babyyyy
What feeders and afk thing are you talking about? We're talking bout the intentional feeding and Derank account players.
I have no idea what the meteos situation is. Though Tyler1 was a feeder and they banned him. And you get plenty of people coming here and asking why they got a 14 day ban for one game of feeding.
So you have one player. Do you have any more evidence?
You want evidence? Okay, just take a scroll down the boards.. you can pick whatever region u want.. have fun
-Dddddddddddank1




































You want evidence? Okay, just take a scroll down the boards.. you can pick whatever region u want.. have fun
-Dddddddddddank1
How is that evidence? It's hard to contest a ban for feeding. The amount of posts on the board is a very very small minority of overall punishments. As far as I know, Riot hasn't released numbers on ratios of either type of punishment, but people DO get punished for intentional feeding and AFK, so that system is working.
![]()
I honestly believe permanent bans of players will hurt them in the long run.. But as long they feed everyone the same stuff they've been told everyone so far 'we're here for you guys' nothing will change. That makes me ask myself, how though? When certain players are getting exemptions of certain behavior that is not tolerated in the rulebook.. *coughMeteos
I believe if you're 'toxic' in the game the correct punishment should be permanent chat restricted but a considerably majority of players seem to think that chattin sh*t is worse then feeding intentionally or throwing certain games and I haven't even brought up players that intentionally are Deranking accounts ...
-Dddddddddddank1
Early it will hurt but in the long run it will bring in more players because they will feel that the problems are being taken care of. It's called having the balls to do it and RIOT don't have them.
Solving the problem? I'm sure everyone still plays with toxic, intent feeders and derank player in a huge amount of games.
Solving the problem? I'm sure everyone still plays with toxic, intent feeders and derank player in a huge amount of games.
Learn to read and comprehend.
I advise you to do the same.
Solving the problem? I'm sure everyone still plays with toxic, intent feeders and derank player in a huge amount of games.
You think. Based on limited perception of the boards. You are not sure.
However I am sure. If you would like make a votepoll and ask whatever region you'd like the question if they still get toxic, intent feed and deranking players in their game.
-Ddddddddddddank1






























However I am sure. If you would like make a votepoll and ask whatever region you'd like the question if they still get toxic, intent feed and deranking players in their game.
Yes. The system can't instantly get rid of all of them. But it does work at getting rid of all three categories.
You got any proof to back that statement up ?
http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/deEEfFWL-too-many-trolls
I don't think. I back it up with facts. Unless you believe all of these people just make up stories ...
-Dddddddank1












Here's the thing about this poll. What anyone believes about the helpfulness of permanent bans is largely irrelevant. If you want to question or argue about whether or not they actually are helpful is a much more meaningful discussion but unfortunately we don't really have access to the information that would allow us to have an informed discussion on that. All we have are our anecdotes.
It reminds me of Newt Gingrich at the RNC telling a reporter that he cares more about how people feel about crime rates than the actual crime rates.
There are undoubtedly downsides to permanent bans, especially since the game is free to play. That said, I think their net benefits FAR outweighs the downsides. If people can't follow the rules, they should not be permitted to play.
I just wanted to open the discussion on wether or not perm ban is the way to handle toxicity. I believe perm chat restricted is a better punishment on solving the toxicity issue instead of perm ban someone. Yes people that are toxic are bad and bring a negative atmosphere to the game.. Yet we have players that are intentionally feeding and if you report them nothing happens..
i don't know what newt gingrich has to do with any of this tho lol think you missing the mark with that one
Your entire thread is about the belief of the usefulness of permanent bans. But the only thing that people's belief on it can be used for is how riot presents info about bans. Not to say that there isn't value in that.
The discussion it seems like you want(or should be what you want, imo) to have is whether or not permanent bans ARE helpful. Beliefs play very little, if any part in that. The question should be "Are permanent ban's helpful". But as I stated before we don't really have the data to have a meaningful discussion on that.
Newt Gingrich doesn't really have anything to do with this other than he had a similar argument in an interview. A reporter was showing him crime statistics that were trending down and he basically said he cared more that people feel like crime is going up than the fact that objectively crime has, and still is, trending down.
If you want to have a discussion on whether or not perma bans are the way to handle toxicity then you should remake this thread without any words like belief or feel. This is a discussion on how people feel about permanent bans, not their actual effectiveness.(you should also probably get rid of the draven head spam if you want to have a serious discussion of any kind).
In my opinion permabans are worthless, if someone is determined to be toxic or ruin peoples game he will just keep buying accounts or making smurfs no matter how many times he gets banned.
[{quoted}](name=Rio Risotto,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=A23oOqNy,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2016-08-03T16:21:46.036+0000)
In my opinion permabans are worthless, if someone is determined to be toxic or ruin peoples game he will just keep buying accounts or making smurfs no matter how many times he gets banned.
And it would increase the number of smurfs leveling up, making new players have to fight against people that have way more skill than them..and would probably quit the game.
According to you guys permanent bans is actually ruining more then helping..
Thanks for the feedback!
-Ddddddank1
















































































And the number of bots leveling accounts to 30.
I recall playing a game where there was a profanity filter and everytime you typed a word that a normal profanity filter would just block out with some asterisks, it would just boot you from the lobby/game instantly. I can't recall if it was only a select few words, or all of them. However, League of Legends isn't a 1v1 game so instead of just impacting the toxic player, they would be impacting everyone on their team as well. So this system wouldn't work all too well with League of Legends, but I think that it would be helpful to find something somewhat similar to deal with toxicity. I think it would be beneficial to have a system that can detect when words that have 0 appropriate use in any form within the game are being said and then automatically issue a warning to that player using the words that they will receive a chat ban for (x) amount of time if they do it again. (I know chat bans currently exist but I am currently under the impression that they are given out after a riot employee reviews reports on a player rather than a chat ban just automatically being enforced). I think something like this could put it into toxic peoples heads to not say certain things otherwise they will just receive a chat ban over and over until they learn to stop. This obviously wouldn't solve all problems with toxicity, including chat-wise, and there are always those people who are just too toxic to change their ways, but I think that it could help.
Gosh, you are really embarrassing
Nope, since you can always just make another account for free, it doesn't solve anything.
Instead of permbanning they should perm ban their chat instead.
My thought exactly!
You mean like they effectively did with 200 game chat restrictions and whatnot? Didn't work. People just resorted to other methods to show their team they're pissed off; i.e. feeding, afking and trolling. And just to be clear here: The chat restrictions effectively made these people do these things. They didn't have any records of that shit before, then they got slapped with more and more chat restrictions and they decided to take it out on their team without using chat.
Permabans might not always work 100% efficiently, but permanent chat restrictions made things even worse. That's essentially negative efficiency.