@WookieeCookie: "Smite support Nunu was reported in 50% of his games" - this is biased.

Jesus is Savior··46 votes·3,795 views

People who are angry and upset because they had to play with him should not be able to determine if the behavior is bannable or not.

Remember the tribunal? The tribunal was judged by an unbiased sample of players who weren't in a high stress ranked environment. They looked at the behavior, unbiased, without the win or loss affecting them, and determined if it was okay or not. This is exactly what is happening on the forums right now. People who play with the Nunu support are obviously going to report him. But despite this, a majority of players actually think his behavior is okay and shouldn't be punishable.

Making the system based on "reports" to determine bad behavior instead of an unbiased jury like the old tribunal system is reshaping the "rules" in a bad way. To use a law/court example, this is like if you let the plaintiff also be the jury and judge in a trial.

This is not okay. So what if Nunu got reported in 50% of his games? Most of the community agrees he shouldn't be banned, and the system is flawed.

I'm also going to put my original reply to your thread here (in case you ever decide to respond to it):

{quoted}

We want players to have fun but not at the expense of teammates. Ideally this means players will coordinate among themselves in a given match and react to the unique circumstances they end up in. If a player is consistently forcing “their vision” on the rest of the team **and **refusing to adapt to their needs we reserve the right to intervene. That’s what happened here (and before with the Singed case); players cried out how terrible the experience was for them and we intervened.

Okay, but lets say he caves in. "Oh okay, you're not okay with my strategy, I guess I have to play a normal support" -> this will happen 99% of the time. His teams will NOT be okay with his strategy. So his team is holding HIM hostage, and he has to conform.

Not to mention: he's diamond. You're basically telling him to "go play something he sucks at" and derank to gold. FYI: this will literally get him reported in 90% of his games, and will be worse than the ~50% figure you quoted for his "off-meta strategy."

It sounds like you need to bring back the tribunal, because Riot employees deciding arbitrary rules does not work. You are enforcing the meta, because his teams will NEVER be okay with his strategy, so he will NEVER be allowed to play it without getting banned.

And no, premades are not an option. No one plays Flex. Flex sucks.

86 Comments

Moooose317 votes

I don't think he was banned because 50% of his games he was reported. He was banned because "If a player is consistently forcing 'their vision' on the rest of the team and refusing to adapt to their needs we reserve the right to intervene." Them citing the amount of reports he got is solely to show how pissed his teammates were at him and how he continued to do the same thing and force others to play the game his way as they put it. I don't agree with the ban necessarily, nor do I care, but it isn't biased, the people who reported him didn't ban him, RIOT took the reports and banned him, with the reports being one of the many reasons behind it.

Jesus is Savior6 votes

{quoted}

I don't think he was banned because 50% of his games he was reported. He was banned because "If a player is consistently forcing 'their vision' on the rest of the team and refusing to adapt to their needs we reserve the right to intervene." Them citing the amount of reports he got is solely to show how pissed his teammates were at him and how he continued to do the same thing and force others to play the game his way as they put it. I don't agree with the ban necessarily, nor do I care, but it isn't biased, the people who reported him didn't ban him, RIOT took the reports and banned him, with the reports being one of the many reasons behind it.

Riot is banning him because "the community" decided his behavior isn't okay (through reports).

It is biased, because "the community" would not condemn this behavior in the old tribunal where an unbiased jury looks over the offenses.

Magical Player7 votes

[{quoted}](name=That Evelynn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2017-02-28T22:33:32.515+0000)

Riot is banning him because "the community" decided his behavior isn't okay (through reports).

It is biased, because "the community" would not condemn this behavior in the old tribunal where an unbiased jury looks over the offenses.

Did you know old tribunal didn't decide on punishment either? Riot still did that

Moooose37 votes

A biased jury didn't look over the offenses, they just presented them. Idk if you know how this, or a court of law works.

BigBellBrute5 votes

[{quoted}](name=That Evelynn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2017-02-28T22:33:32.515+0000)

Riot is banning him because "the community" decided his behavior isn't okay (through reports).

It is biased, because "the community" would not condemn this behavior in the old tribunal where an unbiased jury looks over the offenses.

Unbiased being defined as one that gives the outcome YOU want.

Jesus is Savior5 votes

{quoted}

Unbiased being defined as one that gives the outcome YOU want.

Unbiased being defined as "a group of players who didn't actually play with him" - you don't put the victim on the jury in any trial.

Magical Player8 votes

[{quoted}](name=That Evelynn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=0001000000030000,timestamp=2017-03-01T00:16:59.653+0000)

Unbiased being defined as "a group of players who didn't actually play with him" - you don't put the victim on the jury in any trial.

The people who punished was riot Riot did not play with him they reviewed the evidence of the case Riot is Judge Jury and Executioner they are very fair

Jesus is Savior6 votes

[{quoted}](name=Magical Player,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=00010000000300000000,timestamp=2017-03-01T00:40:10.709+0000)

The people who punished was riot Riot did not play with him they reviewed the evidence of the case Riot is Judge Jury and Executioner they are very fair

They punished him "because he was reported in 50% of his games"

They didn't punish him because he broke the summoner's code or did anything that the UNBIASED community would condemn him for. "He was reported so the community therefore doesn't like this.... ban him." is what Riot did.

But they're wrong. The community would not actually punish this player in the old tribunal.

Moooose38 votes

The victims testified, and Riot believed that he should be banned after seeing the amount of people pissed at him and the amount of games he has ruined. This argument is so stupid, you keep bringing up law analogies and obviously have no idea what you are talking about or how this relates. Riot is the judge/jury. The people reporting him are witnesses and are testifying. You seriously need to either repeat law school or educate yourself on the matter so you can make valid comparisons. The community is simply a bunch of people watching the trial, you have absolutely no say in the matter, nor did you ever. The old tribunal wasn't normal community members talking on the boards. Just stop it's sad.

Jesus is Savior3 votes

{quoted}

The victims testified, and Riot believed that he should be banned after seeing the amount of people pissed at him and the amount of games he has ruined. This argument is so stupid, you keep bringing up law analogies and obviously have no idea what you are talking about or how this relates. Riot is the judge/jury. The people reporting him are witnesses and are testifying. You seriously need to either repeat law school or educate yourself on the matter so you can make valid comparisons. The community is simply a bunch of people watching the trial, you have absolutely no say in the matter, nor did you ever. The old tribunal wasn't normal community members talking on the boards. Just stop it's sad.

Please stop replying to my posts if I'm not directly replying to one of yours. You've already made your point. You don't need to harass me when I'm replying to others. Thanks.

Moooose32 votes

Well somehow you have still not gotten it into your head lol.

Glory ln Death1 votes

You obviously weren't around during the Tribunal. It leaned heavily towards punishing cases, since many people would automatically vote "guilty" to get the majority IP reward.

blueberrypancake1 votes

Actually Phreak played with him shortly before he was banned

Spicy Rice1 votes

Phreak play against him, and lost badly shortly before he was banned

FTFY

Magical Player1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Spicy Rice,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=0001000000030000000000010000,timestamp=2017-03-01T16:05:18.512+0000)

Phreak play against him, and lost badly shortly before he was banned

FTFY

hmm source? I don't doubt its possible, but I've not heard/seen of it until now

Magical Player1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Spicy Rice,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=000100000003000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2017-03-01T23:23:02.857+0000)

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/123657437

interesting so the notion is Phreak said this guy was a troll, and it got bumped up the ladder higher than it needed to be? Is that the claim

Spicy Rice1 votes

No, but I do personally think that it's an interesting coincidence

Magical Player1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Spicy Rice,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=00010000000300000000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-03-02T00:55:49.473+0000)

No, but I do personally think that it's an interesting coincidence

agreed, but if happened at game 50/300 or 299/300 could be of more insight

I don't think I can blame a ban on my account because I ran into a rioter or ex rioter in a random game(2 years ago) imo

Spicy Rice1 votes

If i (and twitch) am not mistaken, the game in said video occurred 9 days ago, so in your example, it'd be game 299

EstebanElGuapo1 votes

phreak likely a nice dude and have nothing to do with it, but one thing of note that is interesting is that wookie stated in a post on reddit that salty rioters do ask for people they played against to be reviewed in an older post about something else longer ago; but seems this paragraph is relateable as to what happens behind the scenes, what is possible with regard to interactions.

RiotWookieeCookie 613 points 2 months ago Since I helped review the pro's at the time, I thought I would jump in with my perspective. We've gotten salty Rioters to ask us to review players before but we deny them unless it was based off provable excessive bad behavior (ie not something like hurt feelings)...

honestly if you think about it enough, had phreak wanted to ask for a review, wookie appears to say that if they could note something reviewable like in this instance the playstyle; then they could follow through with the review. I think for it to be ethical he and other rioters should file a report through the game the way everyone else does, and that all 'show up at your desk or in an email' rioter reports for manual reviews should just be instantly denied. would be more straightforward rules and leave no room for horseplay.

Moooose31 votes

No, but the victim testifies.

Jesus is Savior2 votes

{quoted}

No, but the victim testifies.

Riot's current system bans based on "number of reports" and not the content of the reports. If he was reported for this same behavior but reported less for it then Riot wouldn't have punished him.

TrulyBland1 votes

That doesn't mean the system bans based on reports. It merely means reports are a prerequisite. But the same is true for a lot of crimes. If nobody reports a theft, it's not going to be punished. That doesn't mean people in real life are punished "based on reports".

Glory ln Death2 votes

A better analogy would be to compare it to living in an apartment complex, rather than law. If you're really loud in your apartment, but none of your neighbors complain to the landlord, you won't get punished. But if they do complain, you will.

IllegalBagel8 votes

I have played with this nunu before. He didn't tell me or anyone on the team what he was doing. I didn't die once in lane but I told him if he isn't going to be bot at least gank other lanes. He just afk farmed the enemy jg and died 5 or something times to a nocturn. Its super frustrating when he doesn't communicate with his team. After we went 4 and 10 and lost 3 towers. 4 of us just said open mid and then his first words in chat were "You guys fucking suck why give up so easily" I then replied its demoralizing to fight a 4v5 then we lost and I blocked him. You can tell how much his team hates him just by watching his stream in one of his games they were at botl ane inhib while he was still counter jungling them (imo I think he should be banned) http://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/2415671663/230729012?tab=overview

Take the Draw30 votes

{quoted}

I have played with this nunu before. He didn't tell me or anyone on the team what he was doing. I didn't die once in lane but I told him if he isn't going to be bot at least gank other lanes. He just afk farmed the enemy jg and died 5 or something times to a nocturn. Its super frustrating when he doesn't communicate with his team. After we went 4 and 10 and lost 3 towers. 4 of us just said open mid and then his first words in chat were "You guys fucking suck why give up so easily" I then replied its demoralizing to fight a 4v5 then we lost and I blocked him. You can tell how much his team hates him just by watching his stream in one of his games they were at botl ane inhib while he was still counter jungling them (imo I think he should be banned)

The most obvious clue that this guy is totally making this up is that despite being a very actively played account, he's S7 unranked and S6 Bronze. So no, you haven't played with me before. Nice try though.

IllegalBagel1 votes

[deleted]

Golden Tager X7 votes

You certainly haven't played with him if you don't realize you just said that to him.

TyrekGoldenspear5 votes

Well that must be embarrassing.

Spicy Rice2 votes

AAAAANnnd, he deleted the comment

IllegalBagel1 votes

So your the little *** that decided to double jg without any communication we played in norms and if im correct it was before the season started .I was the Miss fortune that you flamed the only reason I bothered to make this post is cause I recognized your twitch the one you linked me in the end game chat saying "(twitch link)im the best nunu in na I don't have to listen to you little bronzie. Or something like that I don't know how I was placed with a diamond player. But you were clearly the worst diamond player I ever seen. But who knows if you even remember me from what I read you get flamed in all your games. Edit: Gamehttp://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/2415671663/230729012?tab=overview yes I know this is a different name but in the end game chat he did link me his twitch .

Avios15 votes

http://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-history/NA1/230729012?matchType=2&map=1

You have no ranked Miss Fortune games...

Nice try, but try and have a convincing basis, maybe try Garen ADC :P

SilentBomber8 votes

[{quoted}](name=That Evelynn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=,timestamp=2017-02-28T21:26:32.311+0000)

So his team is holding HIM hostage, and he has to conform.

From this large topic i got interested only on this line.Got an easy answer for you.

In every game,if the majority refuses to go along with your tactic,you have to play your role as expected.This guy forced his tactic and HE HELD HIS TEAM hostage instead.In a sense,he infuriated 4 other random players by simply disrespecting and ignoring them.Thus,he earned a fair amount of reports.

Who held who as a hostage in this situation?

TyrekGoldenspear8 votes

This whole fiasco is more proof that Riot can't trust the community to decide what trolling is. They need to bring back the tribunal, even if it's just to handle cases like this that automated systems won't touch.

Magical Player1 votes

{quoted}

This whole fiasco is more proof that Riot can't trust the community to decide what trolling is. They need to bring back the tribunal, even if it's just to handle cases like this that automated systems won't touch.

riot can't trust the community best bring back the tribunal a community led program..... Yeah, because riot can trust the community......

TyrekGoldenspear1 votes

Didn't say the community would man it. :)

I'm talking specific Rioters hired for this.

Magical Player2 votes

{quoted}

Didn't say the community would man it. :)

I'm talking specific Rioters hired for this.

So then our current system of manual reviews????

TyrekGoldenspear1 votes

Specifically hired.

Meaning people who understand off-meta builds != troll builds.

This would literally be all they do, possibly also handle toxicity cases.

Magical Player6 votes

{quoted}

Specifically hired.

Meaning people who understand off-meta builds != troll builds.

This would literally be all they do, possibly also handle toxicity cases.

So the team that handles manual reviews....... the current system riot hand picks who is on that team, so they're doing what you want already

TyrekGoldenspear1 votes

Okay then WookieCookie can just tell them that off-meta roles isn't equal to trolling.

There. Problem solved.

Magical Player3 votes

{quoted}

Okay then WookieCookie can just tell them that off-meta roles isn't equal to trolling.

There. Problem solved.

Q: Can I get banned for choosing a champion or strategy that is outside the current meta?

A: 100% no. Choosing a champion or strategy outside of the current meta is not a factor we take into account when reviewing accounts. On any given day tens of thousands of players are making unusual picks in the game and they’ll never receive penalties in any form. he did already.....

TyrekGoldenspear1 votes

So... What's the problem then?

Magical Player1 votes

{quoted}

So... What's the problem then?

I'm not sure, you wanted tribunal back but it be handled by riot employees Then you wanted wookie to make this statement I'm just confused where you are trying to get to

TyrekGoldenspear3 votes

Oh well. Farewell. This was a perfectly pointless comment chain then.

We probably just made life difficult for the mobile users to scroll down this thing.

Around999People1 votes

Yes you did lol

Skorch1 votes

Well actually if he was only reported in 50% of games, doesnt that mean that ~50% of the time people would probably be okay with it?

Jesus is Savior3 votes

{quoted}

Well actually if he was only reported in 50% of games, doesnt that mean that ~50% of the time people would probably be okay with it?

"Okay with it" after playing with him? Yes.

"Okay with it" in champion select and actually allow him to pick it without him risking a ban? No.

Under these harsh rules stated by Riot, he won't ever be allowed to pick it.

Magical Player2 votes

[{quoted}](name=That Evelynn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=JUNeEPL0,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2017-03-01T01:08:43.490+0000)

"Okay with it" after playing with him? Yes.

"Okay with it" in champion select and actually allow him to pick it without him risking a ban? No.

Under these harsh rules stated by Riot, he won't ever be allowed to pick it.

Enjoy Yourself, but not at Anyone Else's Expense hmm sounds alot like that may of been broken

He can pick it, he just needs to communicate with his team he can always 5 man queue if he wants to always play it.

EndlessSorcerer4 votes

He doesn't even need a 5-man queue.

Duo-queuing with an ADC player would be sufficient since they are the one affected most.

More from Player Behavior

More by Jesus is Savior