Boards›Player Behavior

Do you think this should warrant a permanent ban?

Kamakas··12 votes·8,270 views

Okay so I just logged into the game and found I was permanently banned from the game. Now as I read from the forum rules this is not the place to get punishments overturned, and that's not my goal, I was planning on quitting anyways, this is a nice chance for this. So I'm posting to just ask your opinions, do you think this kind of in-game talk should warrant a permanent ban or not?

And yes, I have been punished in the past aswell, however never for something that you might see in-game where people wish the C word to your family, or ask you to k*s etc.

The problem in my opinion is the automatic system of punishments. Once you have been punished before, the next punishment seems to automatically be harsher than the last one, in a strick defined line. So If you get chat restricted for a minor offence, the next minor offence will be a longer restriction, then ban, then permanent ban. But from the fact that I have still lately seen people showing what I would call "extreme" toxicity, wishing all kind of things to you and your family, being extremely racist etc, I have a feeling they are not getting banned faster, than someone like me. If I am right, being extremely racist is considered the same as saying "ok u are dumb" in Riots eyes.

Anyway here's the chatlog that got me permbanned

In-Game Kamakas: not so early Kamakas: we can poke tho Kamakas: ye Kamakas: okay lol Kamakas: this rengar Kamakas: is just solocarrying Kamakas: lol Kamakas: u just saw how he is sitting bot lmfao Kamakas: how can u still flame Kamakas: ok u are muted kha so dumb lol Kamakas: 2 kills and 20cs ahead playing 3vs2 and jungler blames lmfao Kamakas: u dont listen Kamakas: just ff Kamakas: kha is farming its fine Kamakas: lol Kamakas: what a joke Kamakas: 1 kill participation vs 7 XD Kamakas: 2 kill participation jungler Kamakas: vs 9 Kamakas: XD Kamakas: just go next lol we cant win with this difference Kamakas: U HAD FLASH XDDDD Kamakas: oh my god let me out Kamakas: press yes lol Kamakas: inting Kamakas: report Kamakas: so bad lol Kamakas: not with these plays

97 Comments

Hotarµ10 votes

Something everyone is glossing over is that while OP's punishments may not have been for anything severe, they were still punishments all the same.

When you receive any punishment, you're warned that further offenses will lead to more severe punishments down the line, up to and including a permanent suspension. On the 14-day suspension reform card, it explicitly states that "Any continued negativity will result in a permanent ban."

Imagine you're in a store with 2 other people, the shopkeeper and another customer. The other customer pushes a rack over ruining a bunch of merchandise and making a mess of the place, they're immediately kicked out. You disrupt a customer, the shopkeeper asks you not to do that again. You do it again, the shopkeeper asks you again, a little more sternly, to not do that. You do it one more time and the shopkeeper shouts, telling you that the next time you bother a customer, you will be kicked out.

Any disruption no matter how big or small will get you kicked out, or in this case, permanently banned, because you have been warned multiple times and you're on your last straw.

Your account was pretty much hanging off a cliff, you exhausted all your chances and Riot specifically said "Hey, if you do this again, you're out." It's unfortunate that you got suspended, but even these short logs have problematic elements in them like asking for reports, giving up early/begging your team to FF, and insulting or disrespecting other players (namely "what a joke", calling out the score differences.)

The problem in my opinion is the automatic system of punishments. Once you have been punished before, the next punishment seems to automatically be harsher than the last one, in a strick defined line. (cont.)

If I am right, being extremely racist is considered the same as saying "ok u are dumb" in Riots eyes.

That is not correct and not how the system functions. There are two separate ladders for punishments, we're going to focus on the chat related one.

The standard ladder is as follows:

##10 game chat restriction > 25 game chat restriction > 14 day suspension > Permanent suspension

When you violate the rules with "standard" toxicity (swearing at other users, calling for reports, etc.) you gradually move up the ladder until you reach a permanent suspension. When you use zero-tolerance language (term used for any racist, homophobic, sexist, or other discriminatory slurs + death threats) you immediately receive a 14-day suspension, one step away from a permanent ban.

The end result is the same, yes, as both players are permanently banned, but being extremely racist is treated with much more severe, immediate punishments.

"Ok you are dumb" is not on the same level.

Kamakas5 votes

Thank you, that actually answers my question about the punishment severity between "standard" and "extreme" toxicity, I didn't know that. At least there is some difference. Although, I feel if many people find in this particular case, that the punishment is not warranted, there is a gap between what players know is punishable and what Riot is punishing for.

So if this kind of behaviour, calling someone dumb/showing negative attitude in-game, is punishable, then looking at the standard ladder of punishment you showed, 4 games like this can get you permanently banned from this game. Looking back to my games and the players I know, I honestly think most of the community is not aware of this. I mean of all the cases I have seen from reddit or elsewhere about players being toxic and getting banned, I can't remember anyone getting banned for calling someone dumb in-game.

So the system of punishment for chat related offences is currently like this: for the worst toxicity/racism/death threats you get 1 warning - 2 week ban before a permanent ban. For calling someone dumb/showing negative attitude, you get 3 warnings before a permanent ban. This kind of punishment system honestly seems dumb do me and should be improved.

Anyways, as I wrote in my first post, I'm not here to try to get the ban overturned or justifice my own actions, just ask the people if they think it's warranted and to see if they are aware this kind of behaviour is bannable. Yes, I did get the "Any continued negativity will result in a permanent ban." statement, but because I wasn't aware how easily you can get punished, it didn't prevent me from getting banned.

rujitra2 votes

How do you suggest it can be improved? More warnings? Riot tried that - they found that people who do not reform before a permanent ban tend to not reform (much over 95% of them continued being toxic and just got permabanned eventually anyway). Give a "second chance"? Again, it's been tried (twice now) and failed.

I think most people here are more than open to hearing ideas on how it can be improved - but it will not be "improved" if your ideas of improving serve only to help yourself at the cost of releasing more toxicity from others in the game. Riot cannot make special rules for you - nor can they have an employee sit with you and watch every single game to "monitor" you. They must apply the rules and standards to everyone equally - meaning giving you another chance also gives 19 other players (if we assume 95% to 5% ratio) the chance to ruin more games before they are punished again.

You were referred to the Summoner's Code - which makes quite clear what behaviors are punishable. You also seem to understand that your behavior in this game was not acceptable. You're now saying you weren't aware how 'easily' you can get punished - but you understood yourself that your behavior like this was not okay. I'm not sure how much clearer a warning they can give that any further misbehavior would be a permanent ban - but again, open to hearing your suggestions.

Kamakas2 votes

I'm glad you are open for suggestions but unless you work for Riot I don't see how it can help. From the top of my head though: Put more emphasis on the chat punishments, for chat-related offences. Maybe first warning chat restriction, second warning a temporal chat mute, third warning permanent chat mute and fourth offence of any kind permanent ban of account. This would make much more sense, while not being less tough at all. And as someone who has been chat restricted I can say (and im sure riots statistics would confirm) that they actually do work - certain amount of games without the ability to type much does make you focus more on the game and less on the chat.

And if you mention that I was referred to the Summoner's Code and should know the rules - the fact is, as I have stated before, very many people of this community are not aware that you can be punished for a chat log like I have posted.

LanceTheMighty1 votes

I agree with this, if someone is misbehaving in CHAT they should be punished in CHAT. It's literally just common sense. I actually think that chat restrictions work pretty well, you eventually learn that you can't use your few messages to flame, if you want to actually have a chance at winning. I don't understand why they can't just perma-chat restrict somebody.

rujitra2 votes

Because that is a handicap to your team who you cannot chat with to coordinate. Furthermore, infinitely scaling chat restrictions showed an increase in trolling and griefing behaviors when Riot tried them before.

LanceTheMighty2 votes

For that I think that ranked bans should be added, because as it stands there is currently no way to stop you from queuing up for ranked even if you go 0/20 multiple games in a row.

ModPrandine1 votes

{quoted}

For that I think that ranked bans should be added, because as it stands there is currently no way to stop you from queuing up for ranked even if you go 0/20 multiple games in a row.

So your solution is to allow toxic players to be toxic in other game modes? I don't know why people think this is a good idea as it's not.

Ranked may be considered more competitive than the other modes but not everyone plays ranked, and if someone is being toxic then they shouldn't be allowed to just switch to another mode and continue to be toxic while acting like nothing ever happened to them. That's not fair to the people playing non-ranked modes (they now have a problem child to deal with) and it's not fair to the person displaying the problematic behavior (they don't learn that the rules apply to all game modes equally).

If Jack is consistently causing trouble for everyone and refuses to stop then they should not be allowed to play period as a consequence of their behavior.

LanceTheMighty1 votes

Not toxic behavior, trolling and griefing behavior ( inting ) should be met with a ranked ban.

TrulyBland2 votes

Both of these are considered toxic behaviour.

LanceTheMighty2 votes

Both are "toxic" but one is gameplay toxic and one is chat toxic. Currently it's incredibly hard to be banned for being gameplay toxic.

TrulyBland2 votes

Then this point pretty much still stands:

So your solution is to allow toxic players to be toxic in other game modes? I don't know why people think this is a good idea as it's not.

Hotarµ2 votes

Although, I feel if many people find in this particular case, that the punishment is not warranted, there is a gap between what players know is punishable and what Riot is punishing for.

Well, remember that the Boards are an incredibly small portion of the community (not even 1% most likely), everyone here could agree that the punishment was unwarranted but that still wouldn't be indicative of there being a gap in the public knowledge.

Also, while I'm currently a Specialist on the Boards, I knew about the punishment ladder long before I even started posting here. When I got my first 10 game chat restriction on my now-permabanned main account, it took maybe 15-30 seconds to figure out how the system worked. The information is readily available and even if it wasn't, you already received three prior punishments for this same behavior.

So if this kind of behaviour, calling someone dumb/showing negative attitude in-game, is punishable, then looking at the standard ladder of punishment you showed, 4 games like this can get you permanently banned from this game. Looking back to my games and the players I know, I honestly think most of the community is not aware of this. I mean of all the cases I have seen from reddit or elsewhere about players being toxic and getting banned, I can't remember anyone getting banned for calling someone dumb in-game.

Just to clear up any misconceptions, that's not all you did.

You asked for reports, called someone out for their score and inability to perform, had a negative attitude, and argued (albeit briefly) with your teammates. That being said you also did this 3 times in total, playing through a full 35 games with your chat restricted, waited out a full 2 week suspension, and received reform cards every step of the way.

Even if someone doesn't necessarily agree with the rules, that's ample time to understand what behavior is punishable and change it accordingly.

So the system of punishment for chat related offences is currently like this: for the worst toxicity/racism/death threats you get 1 warning - 2 week ban before a permanent ban. For calling someone dumb/showing negative attitude, you get 3 warnings before a permanent ban. This kind of punishment system honestly seems dumb do me and should be improved.

IMO it's fine, I think it's lenient enough on people and receiving more chances really wouldn't change anything.

If you feel differently, that's your opinion and you're welcome to have it.

Anyways, as I wrote in my first post, I'm not here to try to get the ban overturned or justifice my own actions, just ask the people if they think it's warranted and to see if they are aware this kind of behaviour is bannable. Yes, I did get the "Any continued negativity will result in a permanent ban." statement, but because I wasn't aware how easily you can get punished, it didn't prevent me from getting banned.

No disrespect, I think at that point you should take responsibility for your own actions. You received a notice that explicitly stated any further negativity (such as the three prior punishments you received) would result in a permanent ban. You really can't get much more transparent than that, and as mentioned previously the information was readily available for you to research.

Kamakas1 votes

Well, remember that the Boards are an incredibly small portion of the community (not even 1% most likely), everyone here could agree that the punishment was unwarranted but that still wouldn't be indicative of there being a gap in the public knowledge.

Honestly this feels patronizing at this point lol, not to mention straight up false from the statistical point of view, you could easily make pretty accurate assumptions about the whole western playerbase from lets say the answers of 100 people, in this kind of yes/no question. Although I obviously have not conducted any research on "how many people would agree this warrants a ban" (although this very post was to have an idea about it) and I don't have some empirical data to present to you, I have been playing this game for years, I can't see how anyone else playing in similar environment could not see, that the average player definately is not aware you can be banned for calling someone dumb and being negative to the extent I demonstrated in my last game.

No disrespect, I think at that point you should take responsibility for your own actions. You received a notice that explicitly stated any further negativity (such as the three prior punishments you received) would result in a permanent ban. You really can't get much more transparent than that, and as mentioned previously the information was readily available for you to research.

I have not even opened a ticket and I have said very clearly I am not trying to get the ban revoked, how would you like me to take responsibility for my actions? My past offences are not relevent to my behavior, if i did not know you can get punished for this - again, this is why i made this post, to see if I'm the extreme minority here or not.

Hotarµ1 votes

Honestly this feels patronizing at this point lol, not to mention straight up false from the statistical point of view, you could easily make pretty accurate assumptions about the whole western playerbase from lets say the answers of 100 people, in this kind of yes/no question.

Sorry if it came across as patronizing, that wasn't my intent.

My point was that the Boards are impossibly small compared to Reddit and Twitter, using that as a platform for gauging a public perception won't give you good, accurate results.

Although I obviously have not conducted any research on "how many people would agree this warrants a ban" (although this very post was to have an idea about it) and I don't have some empirical data to present to you, I have been playing this game for years, I can't see how anyone else playing in similar environment could not see, that the average player definately is not aware you can be banned for calling someone dumb and being negative to the extent I demonstrated in my last game.

I have not even opened a ticket and I have said very clearly I am not trying to get the ban revoked, how would you like me to take responsibility for my actions? My past offences are not relevent to my behavior, if i did not know you can get punished for this - again, this is why i made this post, to see if I'm the extreme minority here or not.

That responsibility comment was directed towards this part of your reply when you said:

"Yes, I did get the "Any continued negativity will result in a permanent ban." statement, but because I wasn't aware how easily you can get punished, it didn't prevent me from getting banned."

I wasn't talking to you in particular, I should have made that more clear and repeatedly using "you" was a horrible idea. My point was that if someone is trying to say the warning(s) aren't enough, that's not really fair or correct to say as that excuse can only take someone so far.

Receiving a 10 or 25 game chat restriction is understandable, mistakes happen, but most people will never go further than a 14-day suspension because at that point the system isn't to blame, they're the ones violating the rules that have been made clear to them on multiple occasions.

Even if you look at some of the actual surveys/posts conducted, most players have no issues understanding the rules.

Twitter post by Nasteey with about 300+ entrants.

Reddit post by user Aszelee with almost 5,000 votes.

Strawpoll results from the above post

If you didn't understand that and/or the punishment system as a whole, that's fine and no disrespect to you. But I'm just answering the main question of your post.

Kamakas1 votes

Receiving a 10 or 25 game chat restriction is understandable, mistakes happen, but most people will never go further than a 14-day suspension because at that point the system isn't to blame, they're the ones violating the rules that have been made clear to them on multiple occasions.

I understand what you are trying to say, but that's the whole point I'm trying to make, it isn't this black and white if players don't have clear understanding of what is considered violating the rules and what is not. If someone gets punished for saying get c****r, they will have a clear idea that this is not tolerable, next time they might get punished for calling someone ape (this was my last ban, ape in gameplay context tho) and find out this is considered punishable aswell. Then next time they say dumb they could be permanently banned, while not being aware at all they are breaking the rules.

Same goes for negative attitude. Is saying ff punishable? Can typing out someones score or calling out (without toxic words) get you banned? Saying you have to do it often makes no sense to me. It should either be punishable or not, so people could actually follow the rules and play accordingly, not have this vague idea of "I wonder how many games out of 100 am I allowed to get tilted and show negative attitude in".

The strawpoll you linked only illustrates my concern further. According to that, 37% of the people have been banned at least once. I would expect the reddit playerbase to be much more toxic than the average, but these numbers are insane, 10% permabanned at least once? 8% on more than one account? Sure, most of these people are probably toxic and have refused to change their ways, but this honestly seems to illustrate the fact that there might be a very considerable number of people who either get softer punishments or also permanently banned because of Riots vague ruleset.

Now obviously Riot couldn't just publish the "101 of getting banned" of words and phrases that are not tolerated, since it could help people avoid punishment, but there certainly are ways to make the lines clearer.

Clockwork Mouse4 votes

Na, banning someone from a game should only be reserved for people cheating by using outside means. Riot should open the floodgates, let people be as toxic as they want to be and play the game however they like. [slayer-pantheon-thumbs]

CharDeeMcDenniz1 votes

this is, 100%, guaranteed, without a doubt, NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!

first of all is just a terrible idea

2nd RIOT has recently joined with hundreds of other developers to fight AGAINST toxicity, if anything they, and other giants of the industry, are moving in the exact opposite direction of what you are describing, https://fairplayalliance.org/

Kamakas2 votes

I would be very unpleasantly surprised if Riot moves further in the direction of implementing rules to reduce toxicity, if you can already get banned for calling someone dumb. Even more than that would honestly cross the line of absurdity.

CharDeeMcDenniz1 votes

lol that's where the industry is trending, like it or not

Clockwork Mouse1 votes

Most people don't like it and upsetting a majority of people is not going to be good for business in the long run.

CharDeeMcDenniz2 votes

[{quoted}](name=Clockwork Mouse,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=EjJJA2Ee,comment-id=00080000000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-03T21:21:59.124+0000)

Most people don't like it

citation please.

last time i checked companies do things that make them money, if the majority was against it, they most likely wouldnt do it

Kamakas1 votes

Where exactly is the "industry" trending to, to a point you could get banned more easily, than calling someone dumb? Also by industry I'm not sure what you are talking about exactly. Sure hardcore toxicity, racism etc is bannable pretty much everywhere on internet, however I have never been punished in any other game for being tilted in a game, showing some negative attitude and calling someone "dumb".

CharDeeMcDenniz1 votes

the industry is trending away from allowing toxicity on their private platforms, that's not opinion, that is fact.

and by industry I mean all video games, did you even bother to click the link i posted? literally hundreds of developers have signed on...RIOT, Epic games, EA, Blizzard, etc. "for gaming professionals and companies to work together to develop and share best practices in encouraging healthy communities and awesome player interactions in online gaming. We envision a world where games are free of harassment, discrimination, and abuse, and where players can express themselves through play."

if you see this as a bad thing then idk what to tell ya

Kamakas1 votes

I didn't argue with the fact that not only gaming industry but rather all public platforms have moved towards more strict rules, I was simply asking for clarification, since from my personal experience I have never been or seen anyone get punished for something similar to what this thread was made about in any other online games. And since you were pointing out Riot is moving towards even stricter rules I'm not sure how this is the industry standard?

You clearly agree (I assume) that the chatlog I posted should be punishable, could you maybe clarify with an example, how much further in the direction of stricter rules should Riot go? Maybe point out some phrase or action that should be punishable in future, that maybe isnt yet?

CharDeeMcDenniz1 votes

{quoted}

And since you were pointing out Riot is moving towards even stricter rules I'm not sure how this is the industry standard?

never said it was the industry standard, i said the industry was trending that direction

could you maybe clarify with an example, how much further in the direction of stricter rules should Riot go? Maybe point out some phrase or action that should be punishable in future, that maybe isnt yet?

i never said they should be stricter

if you're going to keep trying to put words in my mouth to suit your argument then i see no need to respond further

goodbye*[slayer-jinx-catface]*

Kamakas1 votes

I don't understand why you are so defensive about it lol, just trying to have a discussion. Let me quote you then, if you feel im putting words into your mouth...

if anything they, and other giants of the industry, are moving in the exact opposite direction of what you are describing

So you are saying that the industry is moving towards stricter rules..I'm not sure how else to understand this.

if you see this as a bad thing then idk what to tell ya

And you clearly agree with this, and that's absolutely fine, I was literally just asking for clarification on what exactly your opinion is, and how much stricter the rules should be, in comparison to what I was punished for?

Clockwork Mouse1 votes

Holy shit, that is one scary alliance. A bunch of corporations gathering around to try and control gamer's speech.

ModPrandine1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Clockwork Mouse,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=EjJJA2Ee,comment-id=000800000001,timestamp=2019-12-03T14:58:59.903+0000)

Holy shit, that is one scary alliance. A bunch of corporations gathering around to try and control gamer's speech.

More like more and more people have decided that despite it being the internet/online games people should still be expected to interact with other real people in a mature and respectful manner and also be held accountable if they choose not to. Besides, just like in real life toxic/disruptive people drive away business, which in turn means less overall players/customers and money, so it's in the best interest of pretty much everyone as a whole to discourage toxic behavior as much as possible. Times are changing, and if people don't like being punished or held accountable for their behavior then maybe they should stop thinking that anonymity is a shield for them to act however they want consequence free.

Clockwork Mouse1 votes

Yes "people" have decided that, sure. It is not large corporations that you are talking about here. This is just a way to censer what people say disguised as some kind of moral good. We all saw what happened to Blitzchung for his hurtful, biggoted words to the Chinese, what a toxic man.

ModPrandine1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Clockwork Mouse,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=EjJJA2Ee,comment-id=00080000000100000000,timestamp=2019-12-03T18:51:39.669+0000)

Yes "people" have decided that, sure. It is not large corporations that you are talking about here. This is just a way to censer what people say disguised as some kind of moral good.

I disagree. People are still allowed to voice their frustrations and criticisms but aren't allowed to start throwing things like insults, name-calling, hate speech and death wishes around. That kind of stuff is unacceptable and is just a very poor way of getting ones point across in general. I fail to see how expecting people to exercise some basic levels of maturity, respect and decency and holding them accountable if they refuse to do so is wrong. Freedom of speech =/= freedom of speech consequences after all.

We all saw what happened to Blitzchung for his hurtful, biggoted words to the Chinese, what a toxic man.

I definitely agree that Blitzchung's case was handled very poorly by Blizzard, and he shouldn't have received the punishment he got.

Kamakas1 votes

As I see this thread has transformed into discussion about whether anything should be bannable at all, which is kind of irrelevent in my opinion, since this is not about some certain industry, this is pretty much the global norm, that death threats, racism etc will get you banned from the platform, be it games, social media or anything else, and the vast majority of people have no issue with it.

The problem in this case is creating an automated system of punishment, where certain type of "soft" negative behaviour can get you punished/banned (not that much differently from the most extreme form of verbal abuse) from the game "if you do it often", or if you have been punished before etc, while producing vague enough information to the customer that people can easily get punished for something they are not aware is punishable. And I'm not saying it to protect negative behaviour of this kind, it's just one of the two most basic objectives of punishments - to prevent people from doing something that is deemed punishable.

CominTowardsYa2 votes

{quoted}

this is, 100%, guaranteed, without a doubt, NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!

You cannot guarantee anything, so please don't do it here.

first of all is just a terrible idea

That is your opinion, and like people's butt's, we all have them, and they all stink.

2nd RIOT has recently joined with hundreds of other developers to fight AGAINST toxicity, if anything they, and other giants of the industry, are moving in the exact opposite direction of what you are describing, https://fairplayalliance.org/

Like the never-ending war on Drugs? Like the War on Terror? You can't fight something this nebulous and win, sorry bad idea objectively. What if they say you're toxic, and they ban you for no reason? I am sure you'd like that wouldn't you.

CharDeeMcDenniz1 votes

strawmen, strawmen everywhere...and not a crap to give

you're not baiting me bud

[slayer-jinx-catface]

CominTowardsYa3 votes

A strawman is when I take something or someone and argue a point against it leaving you unrelated and unable to defend against it, this is a comparison, not a strawman.

Comparing something then pointing out a flaw about it is me making a point.

You not defending your point, or not having anything to counter with other than "strawman" demonstrates how un prepared you are to engage with anyone who disagrees with you.

CharDeeMcDenniz2 votes

{quoted}

you're not baiting me bud

[slayer-jinx-catface]

CominTowardsYa2 votes

You're right I am not. I am giving you my opinion and pointing out what you said was not correct.

BawssDude3 votes

no i dont think anyone should be banned unless its death threats or something like that. people are just snowflakes nowadays

CharDeeMcDenniz6 votes

{quoted}

people are just snowflakes nowadays

this line always cracks me up, like the people raging at complete strangers they will most likely never see again in a video game are somehow stronger or mentally fortified LOL

Clockwork Mouse1 votes

Assuming that the one saying it are raging at all. [sg-lulu]

CharDeeMcDenniz1 votes

yeah, they are

Clockwork Mouse2 votes

It sounds like you are just mad.

CharDeeMcDenniz1 votes

says the guy spamming rageposts all over the forum

Clockwork Mouse1 votes

You just call whatever you disagree with spam. I am offering sound advice

CharDeeMcDenniz1 votes

whatever you say LOL

bye*[slayer-jinx-catface]*

Clockwork Mouse1 votes

Bye

CominTowardsYa2 votes

I agree with this line of thinking. People pay money, and should be given as many chances as they need or refunded.

ModPrandine

{quoted}

I agree with this line of thinking. People pay money, and should be given as many chances as they need or refunded.

With that logic no one would ever be permabanned and the people who pay the most would get off scott free essentially. People already complain about trolls and inters not being banned as much as verbal abuse cases, so why implement a system that protects those players simply because they pay money?

First off spending money is optional with only cosmetics being purchasable for real money. Second of all why should someone be given a refund if they've consistently caused a negative environment for many other customers? If you go to a restaurant and pay for your meal but then start causing a disruption to the point where you're forced to leave you don't magically get a refund, nor do you deserve it. Yes you spent money but that doesn't matter as there are many other customers who spent money and aren't causing disruptions. If you go to an arcade, spend money on tokens or whatever and then start harassing and shouting up a storm every time things don't go your way, the workers there will have you leave without a refund.

The same thing applies here. Riot is a business & thus like any business they're under no obligation to give someone infinite chances or immunity to punishments, especially if the person in question has shown time & time again that they don't care about the rules. At that point it's better for everyone else to just remove the disrupter from the place & not give them a refund. Refunds are often only given to the customer for product or service errors out of their control, not when the customer in question is causing a negative environment for others if that makes sense.

To quote Kei143:

When Riot permabans someone, their philosophy is "the chances of this guy reforming isn't a whole lot, we'd rather not have him in the game". Thus in their eyes, they have already written off the toxic player as a paying client.

From a business standpoint, do they want to remove the toxic guy who has spent $500 but is causing a negative environment for 4-9 other players in every game? Those non-toxics are also spending $500 and probably will spend more, promote the game more when they are enjoying the game AND they won't cause a negative environment.

I personally think it is a fine argument to protect the ones that are paying money and aren't toxic rather than protecting the ones that may pay the same amount but are toxic.

I get that people want to protect their investment, but at the same time the investee is and should be under no obligation to keep protecting and coddling the investor every time they act up and vice versa if that makes sense.

If people truly valued their money spent on the game then ideally they wouldn't misbehave to the point where Riot is forced to permaban them and ask them to leave. Riot may not be perfect and deserving of criticism for some of their actions but the whole "I spent money so I should be immune to consequences" argument people use just feels entitled to me personally.

CominTowardsYa1 votes

{quoted}

With that logic no one would ever be permabanned and the people who pay the most would get off scott free essentially. People already complain about trolls and inters not being banned as much as verbal abuse cases, so why implement a system that protects those players >simply because they pay money?

People complain about their money not being refunded too, why are we not catering to both parties with legitimate concerns?

First off spending money is optional with only cosmetics being purchasable for real money. Second of all why should someone be given a refund if they've consistently caused a negative environment for many other customers? If you go to a restaurant and pay for your meal but then start causing a disruption to the point where you're forced to leave you don't magically get a refund, nor do you deserve it. Yes you spent money but that doesn't matter as there are many other customers who spent money and aren't causing disruptions. If you go to an arcade, spend money on tokens or whatever and then start harassing and shouting up a storm every >time things don't go your way, the workers there will have you leave without a refund.

Because this is the gaming world, not the real world with buildings, real estate, people physically interacting. This is online where no one can slip and fall, or hurt anyone with force. The disruptions you talk about are limited to playing the game. Just as paying money is voluntary, so is playing the game, or playing with people you don't like whom are disruptive. These are options for the people complaining, they don't need to group with the troll, or they can mute them, eat the loss and move on. When you take someone's money, they worked for it, and it should be protected because it has value. Playing with someone and disrupting them has no inherent value, and can be avoided by the choice of the player offended by the misconduct. In a store you walk out of the store, but you also may be stopped by someone, beaten or killed on the spot, here online that is impossible, so your comparison while note worthy is not enough.

The same thing applies here. Riot is a business & thus like any business they're under no obligation to give someone infinite chances or immunity to punishments, especially if the person in question has shown time & time again that they >don't care about the rules.

Yeah they have no obligation if they issue a full refund on purchases. Maybe even with a time limit on them. This is another topic for discussion.

At that point it's better for everyone else to just remove the disrupter from the place & not give them a refund. Refunds are often only given to the customer for product or service errors out of their control, not when the customer in question is causing a >negative environment for others if that makes sense.

It is a two way street, )(Remove both people involved no matter what then.) as with a night club, the bouncers will toss out everyone involved. Doesn't work? Well, Riot is not the standard for moral conduct, and is not equipped to be an arbitrator. They are a business, not an ethics committee. This should not be a thing at all.

To quote Kei143:

I get that people want to protect their investment, but at the same time the investee is and should be under no obligation to keep protecting and coddling the investor every time they act up and vice versa if that makes sense.

If people truly valued their money spent on the game then ideally they wouldn't misbehave to the point where Riot is forced to permaban them and ask them to leave. Riot may not be perfect and deserving of criticism for some of their actions but the whole "I spent money so I should be immune to consequences" argument people use just feels entitled to me personally.

There either is or isn't value in money, people don't have to value it. We will agree that Money has inherent value based on human economics, not what a player gives it, or what Riot gives it. Riot doesn't make that call, nor should they ever. Money has value and that value is respected by the entire world, Riot somehow thinks it doesn't need to respect the value of money now?

THISGAMEISTRASHK1 votes

My guy I like the way you grrr ave your rebuttal

More from Player Behavior

The indefinite banning of Tyler1
Player Behavior4,799 comments
2,942
votes
14 day ban because playing Nunu Support with Smite is "stealing other people's roles"...?
Player Behavior1,525 comments
1,086
votes
Riot should add monthly status cards
Player Behavior241 comments
843
votes
Reminder that we haven't gotten our Summoner report cards yet :/
Player Behavior145 comments
619
votes
I'm not "triggered" by you throwing insults.
Player Behavior361 comments
548
votes
Black Alistar, King Rammus!!!!
Player Behavior462 comments
503
votes