Boards›Player Behavior

Consistency and severity

SonicAF·10/26/2018, 9:53:38 AM·2 votes·2,294 views

You know what they say, you shouldn't worry if you get reported often, false reports do nothing.

Well, it's true. If you are saint. Let's take a hypothetical example. I'll use concrete numbers to make example more clear but they should not be exactly that.

We have two players being mildly obnoxious. They like the phrase "stop feeding" and use it in 30% of their games.

Assuming this type of behaviour requires major consistency to get punished, let's take a 20% threshold - if you get 20% of your last 100 games reported and you say "stop feeding", you get a chat restriction to show that your behaviour is not okay.

The first player mains Tristana and is fairly decent at the game. He is an exemplary player of his rating and his performance has no glaring flaws for other people to notice. Community doesn't perceive a single instance of "stop feeding" as report-worthy and Tristana gets away with 5% of her games receiving a report. She would never reach the threshold to get punished.

The second player mains toplane Soraka. He gets reported every time he loses the ga!e plus sometimes when he loses his lane, despite the game being won, resulting in 60% games heavily skewed towards the lost games, where our player is more likely to say "stop feeding", making him very likely to reach necessary threshold, despite displaying the same behaviour as the Tristana player.

It should not necessarily be off-meta. It can potentially affect many people, like those with feminine nicknames or those who had reductions in performance due to RL difficulties or bad luck in league(talking about tilt). Sure, it won't be 5 to 60%, but even 19% to 20% is a huge difference.

Be welcome to try and justify it or prove that current punishment system relying on reports doesn't affect some groups of people more than the others for the same violations.

67 Comments

TrulyBland10/26/2018, 2:01:05 PM5 votes

I mean, theoretically there is nothing that would prevent a scenario similar to this in the real world. As a matter of fact we do have rather similar problems in real life, which we still haven't been able to sort out.

So while it's always good to point such inequalities out, I feel like there is not a whole lot we can do about it, except use the report function responsibly and try to be tolerant to other peoples' playstyles and mistakes.

I reject the notion that false reports are the issue here, though. There are two separate necessary requirements to being punished, one of which is completely in your control. Hence the impact of such malicious reports (which I wouldn't really consider false) is also 100% in control of the reported player.

Voldymort10/26/2018, 10:15:03 AM3 votes

Assuming this type of behaviour requires major consistency to get punished, let's take a 20% threshold - if you get 20% of your last 100 games reported and you say "stop feeding", you get a chat restriction to show that your behaviour is not okay.

let me stop you right there.

"stop feeding" will never get you punished by itself since it's not a toxic thing to say

based on the demeanor you have today, i predict that your comeback line will be "what's your proof that it isn't toxic?" and to that i say:

"the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence". If you think that it's a toxic statement then please provide an explanation on why it's supposed to be!

Community doesn't perceive a single instance of "stop feeding" as report-worthy and Tristana gets away with 5% of her games receiving a report. She would never reach the threshold to get punished.

you seem to be under the impression that the number of reports matter. they don't

The second player mains toplane Soraka. He gets reported every time he loses the ga!e plus sometimes when he loses his lane, despite the game being won, resulting in 60% games heavily skewed towards the lost games, where our player is more likely to say "stop feeding", making him very likely to reach necessary threshold, despite displaying the same behaviour as the Tristana player.

i get the feeling this is the "support singed" argument

[zombie-nunu-bummed]

that player was not punsihed for playing singed in the support role. he was punished for neglecting his team and doing his own thing regardless of what his team needed from him.

It can potentially affect many people, like those with feminine nicknames

sexist much?

first of all, a feminine nickname does not mean the player is 100% female, just like a manly nickname does not mean that the player is 100% male. i know planty of people (men and women) who prove this point.

secondly, why do you assume that it will affect "those with feminine nicknames" in particular? what is it that you find different about them?

i mean... look at my name: would you say i'm female? why/why not? and also... why does it matter to you which it is?

Be welcome to try and justify it or prove that current punishment system relying on reports doesn't affect some groups of people more than the others for the same violations.

that moment when your only argument is playing the victim card

[zombie-brand-facepalm]

ModThe Djinn10/26/2018, 12:27:33 PM3 votes

This sort of thing can definitely occur, but it's a necessary side effect of a system that learns from -- and gives power to -- the community.

The two possibilities are this:

A system watches all chat all the time, judging every player by an identical, non-community-based metric. Any violations are punished accordingly.
A system watches only chat that players have deemed problematic, checking them against the current community standards and incorporating that data into it's knowledge base going forward.

The current system uses the second one of these, and I think it's better for a few reasons:

It allows the community to say what is or isn't okay.
It allows the system to learn and adapt to the community's opinions.
It allows more leeway for individual players when their team isokay with their behavior.

While it does have minor inconsistencies such as this discrepancy you mention, the benefits of allowing the community to have a say in how it judges itself is, I feel, a significant enough advantage that this system is superior to a flat monitoring system.

Kei14310/26/2018, 10:37:07 AM2 votes

Hmm... not too sure what you are trying prove here. Is this one of those things that you are putting out there for the sake of argument?

Umbral Regent10/26/2018, 12:57:08 PM1 votes

You know what they say, you shouldn't worry if you get reported often, false reports do nothing.

Well, it's true. If you are saint.

Huh. The bar for being a saint must've gone straight to the bottom then, if someone as angry and un-virtuous as me can be considered one.

Helluva world we live in.

The first player mains Tristana and is fairly decent at the game. He is an exemplary player of his rating and his performance has no glaring flaws for other people to notice. Community doesn't perceive a single instance of "stop feeding" as report-worthy and Tristana gets away with 5% of her games receiving a report. She would never reach the threshold to get punished.

The second player mains toplane Soraka. He gets reported every time he loses the ga!e(sic) plus sometimes when he loses his lane, despite the game being won, resulting in 60% games heavily skewed towards the lost games, where our player is more likely to say "stop feeding", making him very likely to reach necessary threshold, despite displaying the same behaviour as the Tristana player.

Okay? I see nothing in these examples talking about false reports. I don't understand the point you're trying to make if it's something we don't already know.

If a player is not reported, their behavior is not reviewed, and consequently they don't get punished. If a player is reported, their behavior is reviewed, and a punishment may be applied.

The only thing unique about your scenarios is that one is playing off-meta and losing frequently, while the other is playing meta and winning frequently. Is there literally any point to that?

It should not necessarily be off-meta. It can potentially affect many people, like those with feminine nicknames or those who had reductions in performance due to RL difficulties or bad luck in league(talking about tilt). Sure, it won't be 5 to 60%, but even 19% to 20% is a huge difference.

Again, what the hell does this have to do with "false reports"? You don't even use false reports in your examples, just red herrings to use as subjective, player-driven reasons to report someone, such as off-meta or poor performance.

If you're gonna discuss false reports, maybe actually use examples of false reports? Like, someone getting reported for hate speech without ever saying hate speech. Or getting reported for Intentionally Feeding when they just got their ass beat.

But using a cut and dry "yes, this will validate reports, just player A gets reported less often than player B"...That is the worst possible example I could think of.