Why don't we throw away riot's punishment system as a whole and do this instead?

Alex Luu·11/29/2017, 7:41:45 AM·1 votes·416 views

We have appointed community managers who are like the judges and the forum members are the jury and vote on if they deserve to be punished or not and select which punishment they should obtain. Forum has access to chat logs and an video of the match that was reported if the Communiy manager (CM) decides to. It's our community,why not let us decide who to ban? Sure, there will be those who troll and vote yes or no all the time but that would most likely be outweighed by all the righteous voters; Community Managers also have the final decision making to make sure fake reports don't get out of hand.

7 Comments

CooL Ice Tea11/29/2017, 7:55:51 AM6 votes

Because this kind of system was online with the tribunal where everyone could vote for a punish or for freedom. With that system it needed about half a year or longer for the person which got reported to get punished. This is way too slow.

Secondly who will be a community manager? People with no bad behaviour? Bad Idea because you can tell that I would judge damn the hell hard on those flaming jerks even tho I didn't get punished the last 6 years. You can't give some "stranger" the power to punish one of your customers. There is no reason why a business would risk to lose customers by wrong judgements.

Sarutobi11/29/2017, 11:41:20 AM3 votes

I dont think you understand how many reports/bans get handed out daily. This isnt something that happens once a week/month. Its a daily thing, and to think that only a handful of Community Managers can deal with you are out of your mind! Let alone the one reason why the Tribunal failed in the first place was that people were abusing it. And giving the community that much power wasnt a good thing, so bringing it back wont work.

I do think the Tribunal would work if they redid it, they just need to pick the right people to handle this situation. and the thing is you would need to pick from literally thousands of people because with how often people get reported daily, there is no way only a couple hundred players could keep up with the mass amounts of reports they would need to deal with on a daily basis!

ModThe Djinn11/29/2017, 1:11:06 PM2 votes

There would be virtually no change other than a slower, less efficient system. We can demo a community manager system here -- the Advisors, for example, are partially selected for their thorough knowledge of Riot's behavioral rules and the community, and they almost always end up agreeing with automated restrictions because the current system DOES learn from community feedback. KYS used to be barely a slap on the wrist and, as the community has shown through reports that they don't tolerate that phrase, it has moved up to a zero-tolerance phrase.

Mindspeaker11/29/2017, 1:12:52 PM2 votes

There was a post on this subject yesterday.

As for always pushing yes.....Alot of the times that was the case... and it was Justified.

Alot of player do not understand the concept of no matter what happens in the game there is absolutely no justification for being negative (chat) or negative actions ( gameplay ) or responding to any type of negativity in any way shape or form.

{quoted}

They did that before it was called "tribunal" I spent a lot of time in it . It was a good sense of accomplishment being able to help clean up the community. they canned it long ago and from my understanding its not coming back .

it should not be rewarded either IMO

{quoted}

As someone who has been around since the early days of the behavior system, some comments:

The data derived from the Tribunal forms the basis of the IFS, so it really is the community's preferences being expressed through the bans.

The IFS adapts to what people report and don't report. Two years ago "KYS" was fairly low on the toxicity scale. Now it's almost a zero-tolerance phrase.

The IFS is very, very accurate. This is what happens when you have 4+ years of machine learning under your belt.

The punishment is structured in a very deliberate way. The chat restrictions are there for people who need to improve their chat, but anything more serious gets escalated quickly. This is because the data shows the vast majority of players will correct themselves after one or two punishments, regardless of the specific punishment being applied.

The main problem with the Tribunal was the slow speed of processing. It's important the system respond quickly to behavior, so as to minimize the damage from toxic players.

Other players' chat logs are unnecessary and a distraction. This is because no amount of toxicity justifies adding to toxicity.

They already tried giving people IP. It didn't affect participation very much and generally caused more problems than it solved.

FOR JUSTICE11/29/2017, 11:45:23 AM1 votes

I suggested the same thing. Apparently before they had this thing called the tribunal sysyem, where we would vote if the log was toxic. If your vote matched the current consensus, you were rewarded IP. But because of how long it took to get a vote, and how people had a mob mentality and just voted yes for the IP, they decided to scrap it

The Cream Reaper11/29/2017, 9:28:17 AM1 votes

We have appointed community managers who are like the judges and the forum members are the jury and vote on if they deserve to be punished or not and select which punishment they should obtain.

https://i.imgur.com/1QMq6MF.gif

Kei14311/29/2017, 12:20:02 PM1 votes

It kind of already is doing that.

The system learns from what we as a community report and punish people based on what the community thinks is not OK.