How do people like this not have perma bans?
-removed by moderation-
So this guy kept telling us to kill ourselves and called us r%%%%%s nonstop in game and yet he doesn't get punished for it. How is riot's system fair?
43 Comments
Blame me im jng4 votesThe saddest part is we had a riotter in our game too.
Julevi1 votesAre you sure about that?
Blame me im jng1 votesYes the riven had riot in their name and only riotters can have that.
Kei1434 votesWhether the game had a Rioter or not doesn't matter. They still have to go through the same system and allow the system to judge others.
This method ensures that there is no one abusing their powers, and everyone is judged through the same method without bias.
Blame me im jng3 votesThe problem is Riot's system goes off of a word based system. They don't have anyone to actually inspect to see people's toxicity. Having a robot do all of your ban work leads to unjust bans and people who are SUPER toxic not getting banned because they avoid the key phrases.
Imperial Pandaa3 votesBut you said the person told you all to "kys" and called you r%%%%%ed. Both of which get detected by the system; if you reported the person of course.
Blame me im jng2 votesI did but he didn't word it as kys he worded it as "Hang yourself"
Imperial Pandaa3 votesYou can always submit a support ticket. Tell them you are concerned that "hang yourself" would go around the IFS as it is a variation of "kys".
Eedat3 votesFairly certain hang yourself gets picked up just like other variants like neck yourself
E4202 votesTrue. The automated system has a "dictionary" with words that it automatically flags and K Y S is one of them. If I am right, most other variations of K Y S are manually reviewed and that takes time as the reports end up in a queue with tons of reports.
I hated the fact I was banned 20 seconds after my post-game screen for saying K Y S once, but thinking about it, the automated system isnt yet smart enough to differ the variations, thus it takes time to "investigate" the report and punish the player.
Two days ago I was banned for "wtf" and "drunk and mad" (seemed to be the last straw) to trigger a ban. However seemed to be a "human mistake" and it got lifted.
Edit: Idk if you havent done it yet, but open up a ticket with pictures of the chat/game and they will get back to you. I know it is stupid it takes them a week to "do" something about it, unfortunately there is nothing more to do than pushing your ticket if necessary.
Edit #2: Since my ban I am reporting any of those K Y S (and its variation) people and open up tickets for them. Three out of four reported people have stopped playing for a couple days; either holiday or banned. Oh also, they said K Y S variations, so not K Y S itself.
Devilreaper XIII1 votes[{quoted}](name=Best Hecarimjob,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=LMYoaoTH,comment-id=000200010000,timestamp=2019-08-10T15:11:30.726+0000)
The problem is Riot's system goes off of a word based system. They don't have anyone to actually inspect to see people's toxicity. Having a robot do all of your ban work leads to unjust bans and people who are SUPER toxic not getting banned because they avoid the key phrases.
they have staff checking it from time to time, you can speed it up by sending a ticket, when they wanted to implement this system their goal was indeed to remove the human factor, but the first tests were so bad they couldn't.
Kei1432 votesTickets are slower than the post game report system itself.
rujitra1 votesTheir goal was never to remove the human factor. Riot is not a bunch of 4th graders who have grandiose and unrealistic expectations.
Devilreaper XIII1 votesTheir goal was never to remove the human factor. Riot is not a bunch of 4th graders who have grandiose and unrealistic expectations.
''and effort in a game with 67 million players every month. The new system seems to remove that human review step from the process, allowing for nearly instant punishment.
Riot said it would have its moderation team hand-review the first 1,000 cases handled by the instant feedback system as it rolled out on North American and EU servers last week. In any case, Lin writes on the forums that Player Support representatives previously "saw false positive rates in the 1 in 6000 range. So, we know the system isn't perfect, but we think the accuracy is good enough to launch."
The roll out has predictably received over a thousand comments on the League of Legends forums, with plenty of people pushing back against the idea of automated punishment without human review (or of player chat moderation in general). On Friday, Lin tweeted that Riot has already "tuned the NA/EU reform systems slightly more conservative while we observe over the weekend." Lin also cryptically tweeted that "one case of the system being overaggressive is not a reason to shut the system off. Let's be reasonable everyone!"''
''Punishment is supposedly handed down within 15 minutes after a game concludes. But how accurate can an automated system really be?
“In terms of false positives, we recently flew in Player Support and Player Behavior team members from all around the world to hand-review thousands of chat logs, and we saw false positive rates in the 1 in 6000 range,” Lin said.
The reform system is currently in a “testing” period, meaning that actual Riot Games employees will review the first several thousand reports. If all goes well, it’ll be introduced to all other regions that “League of Legends” is available in — Europe, Korea, China and Southeast Asia.''
they most certainly intended to remove the human factor entirely, but since the system NEVER worked properly, they still have staff members hand reviewing reports here and there, especially when a tikcet is send.
so i guess they really are 4th graders with grandiose and unrealistic expectations according to you, btw so many players were ignored all because Jeff Lin wanted to bring his oh so great automated system to the GDC 2015 like it was the best thing ever developed.
rujitra1 votesSo, as you can clearly see, their goal was never to have the automated system operate independent of human review. They always intended to have these human reviews conducted to ensure the system continued to work. Nothing you linked suggests they had to change it because it "NEVER worked properly".
You have your idea, and it's wrong. Period.
Devilreaper XIII1 votesSo, as you can clearly see, their goal was never to have the automated system operate independent of human review. They always intended to have these human reviews conducted to ensure the system continued to work. Nothing you linked suggests they had to change it because it "NEVER worked properly".
You have your idea, and it's wrong. Period.
are we reading the same thing? are you in denial, or are you trolling?
it states, i quote again ''The reform system is currently in a “testing” period, meaning that actual Riot Games employees will review the first several thousand reports.'' end quote
start quote ''Riot said it would have its moderation team hand-review the first 1,000 cases handled by the instant feedback system as it rolled out on North American and EU servers last week'' end quote
start quote ''The roll out has predictably received over a thousand comments on the League of Legends forums, with plenty of people pushing back against the idea of automated punishment without human review (or of player chat moderation in general).'' end quote
they ALWAYS intended to rule out the human factor, they were NEVER planning on reviewing ANY of the feedback/punishments after the TESTING PERIOD as long as the system worked..... but the test and the players on the boards were NEGATIVE about the system, therefore they KEPT staff members reviewing here and there, even without players sending tickets.
tell me, what do you think AUTOMATED means? and what is the point of AUTOMATED if it requires human intervention? (and i'm not talking about maintenance)
rujitra1 votesRight... so while they tested it, they reviewed every single case. Then they dropped it down to a spot checking system that they have now.
Like, you are trying so hard to have that mean what you want it to mean.
Automated in this instance means that the initial decision is automated. However, there still is and was always intended to be human review - both "on demand" (i.e. someone contacts support and asks for a review of their punishment or further review of a report they submitted) as well as scheduled (i.e. the system can forward cases to humans that it thinks are borderline, as well as humans spot checking the system).
The quote says that there was pushback against automated punishment without human review - which is similar to the fact there was pushback over how "IP is worse than BE" - even though that's completely false.
Devilreaper XIII1 votesRight... so while they tested it, they reviewed every single case. Then they dropped it down to a spot checking system that they have now.
their intend was to drop giving AND hand checking punishments, it all is automated.
Like, you are trying so hard to have that mean what you want it to mean.
Automated in this instance means that the initial decision is automated. However, there still is and was always intended to be human review - both "on demand" (i.e. someone contacts support and asks for a review of their punishment or further review of a report they submitted) as well as scheduled (i.e. the system can forward cases to humans that it thinks are borderline, as well as humans spot checking the system).
just because there always was or is human review, does not mean they never intended so, like i said thats why there was a test period, the system failed hard, the players on the boards were incredibly negative, and they got overwhelmed by tickets from players that stated they were wrongly punished, which is why its called AUTOMATED feedback system, no human intervention shouldve been afterwards, since riot STATED that it was too much to handle for its staff.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/05/riot-rolls-out-automated-instant-bans-for-league-of-legends-trolls/ start quote ''Previously, though, those automated reports were simply escalated to be manually reviewed by the Player Support team, which could take significant time and effort in a game with 67 million players every month. The new system seems to remove that human review step from the process, allowing for nearly instant punishment'' end quote
so the hand reviewing even today shows the failure of this system. this automated system really beats its purpose, since anyone can send tickets, and staff members are still hand reviewing here and there, just a little less than usual.
The quote says that there was pushback against automated punishment without human review - which is similar to the fact there was pushback over how "IP is worse than BE" - even though that's completely false.
so the title specialist stands for troll. NOTED.
even riot employee never denied that the system was intended to remove the human factor since the tribunal was being abused so hard, and hand reviewing every report was too much.
and IP was there before BE so you got that in reverse, and getting champions took, and takes a lot longer now..... yes there has been a pushback against BE, and rightfully so, there was no real reason behind it other than to keep players playing longer and driving players insane so they would spend RP instead, this affected new players the most.
rujitra1 votesYou've shown now you don't trust evidence you disagree with, as there's tons of indisputable math that proves BE is better than IP for the vast majority of players.
Thanks for completely discrediting any argument you make in the future.
Devilreaper XIII1 votesYou've shown now you don't trust evidence you disagree with, as there's tons of indisputable math that proves BE is better than IP for the vast majority of players.
Thanks for completely discrediting any argument you make in the future.
what evidence? you are contradicting yourself, you stated that there was pushback about how IP was worse than BE, this is not true, i corrected you, and all of a sudden i don't trust evidence?
it has been proven over and over that BE system is worse than IP simply because you need to grind more, you had to spend BE on mastery and couldn't create the champions you wanted unless you had all 3 shards, so yeah they improved some things now, IP is still better, the reason they changed IP to Be was to encourage the use of RP.
it took me over 100 matches to level up twice now, worst case i get 1620BE best case i get 2480BE + 50Be per day for first win of the day, times 100 = 5000 Be per 100 matches, 1620 + 5000 = 6620 Be per 100 matches, 2480 + 5000 = 7480 Be per 100 matches, thats one 6300 champion or one 4800 and one 1350 or one 3150 and two/three 1350 or four/five 1350 champions depending on worst or best case scenario.
first win of the day is 150IP and i play on average 6 matches per day +-30 minutes on average per match, is worst case 16 + 30 = 46 per match, 46 x 6 = 276IP per day thats 276 X 100 = 27.600IP per 100 matches, best case is 18 + 60 = 78 IP per match 468 + 150 = 618 per day 618 x 100 = 61.800IP per 100 matches, worst/best case are impossible since i would have to lose/win EVERY game, on average lets say i win 3 and lose 3 per day thats 234 + 138 + 150 = 522 Ip per day 522 x 100 = 52200IP per 100 matches on average, thats eight 6300IP champions per 100 matches, even in the worst case thats three to four 6300IP champions, so they can stick that indisputable math there were the sun don't shine.
rujitra1 votesNo, your math is still wrong. In fact, there's multiple large posts by users proving your math wrong - but you seem unwilling to look at these.
Devilreaper XIII1 votesNo, your math is still wrong. In fact, there's multiple large posts by users proving your math wrong - but you seem unwilling to look at these.
[zombie-brand-facepalm]
i know for a fact you are troll now, did you even read what i wrote? i made an error on purpose, you didn't even notice like wtf
k so here comes the real math even though you appear to be a troll.
50 be or 150 IP win of the day
least amount of BE per level up is 810 biggest amount of BE per level up is 1240 im talking 2 level ups so 1620 and 2480 50 BE first win of the day every day 100 matches long is 5000 BE 1620 + 5000 = 6620 and 2480 + 5000 = 7480 100 matches total BE = 6620BE to 7480BE
IP = 16 + 1 per minute if lose im talking 100 matches with an average of 30 minutes, so thats 16 + 30 = 46 IP per match all lose no first win of the day 46 X 100 = 4600IP per 100 matches above scenario is impossible unless you are trolling
IP = 18 + 2 per minute if win im talking 100 matches with an average of 30 minutes, so thats 18 + 60 = 78 IP per match every day first win of the day is: i play on average 6 matches per day, so 100 / 6 = 16 first win of the day 16 X 150 = 2400IP 78 X 100 = 7800IP, 7800 + 2400 = 10.200IP per 100 matches above scenario is impossible unless you are asain or something.
IP = 18 + 2 per minute if win IP = 16 + 1 per minute if lose im talking 100 matches with an average of 30 minutes, i play on average 6 matches per day, so 100 / 6 = 16 first win of the day, 16 X 150 = 2400IP, lets say i average 3 win and 3 lose per day thats 50 win and 50 lose, 18 + 60 = 78IP, 78IP X 50 = 3900IP per 50 matches, 16 + 30 = 46IP, 46 X 50 = 2300IP, 3900 + 2300 + 2400 = 8600IP average per 100 matches.
here it comes 8600IP - 7480BE = 1120IP difference on average per 100 matches now lets go to 200 matches thats, 8600 + 8600 = 17.200IP, 7480 + 7480 = 14.960BE, 17.200 - 14.960 = 2240IP difference etc
in the end you'd get more out of IP than BE, even if its not that much, players still notice.
rujitra1 votesYour math leaves out quite a few glaringly obvious considerations that you must take in to account, but okay, believe what you want instead of looking at the math Riot and players proved time and time again.
Kei1432 votesHalf correct.
Word base is only for the Zero Tolerance part of the verbal punishment system.
Non-ZT toxicity is handled by a Machine Learning system that learns from our reports and assorted internet mediums to understand new forms of insults and harassment and is not just a simple word search.
Though you are correct that the verbal punishment system is largely automated and humans are only used for spot checks.
Devilreaper XIII1 votesHalf correct.
Word base is only for the Zero Tolerance part of the verbal punishment system.
Non-ZT toxicity is handled by a Machine Learning system that learns from our reports and assorted internet mediums to understand new forms of insults and harassment and is not just a simple word search.
Though you are correct that the verbal punishment system is largely automated and humans are only used for spot checks.
actually the other part is just as much an archive, the system does not learn, its driven by the community so if a certain amount of trolls decided that ''gg'' should be punishable, and they report players for saying ''gg'' the system will pick this up, it does so by saving the phrase ''gg'' and than crosschecking it with the amount of reports, and based on that it determines the severity of the punishment/feedback, and can near instant (15 minutes after in the least) punish someone for saying ''gg'', a staff member would obviously have to intervene at that point and remove the phrase ''gg'' from the list or permanently block the phrase from ever getting on the list again, the latter would probably be never done since it goes against the purpose of the system itself, which is a community driven feedback/punishment system, basically the EXACT same as the tribunal just automated.
so again to make it clear, the system doesn't learn by adding unacceptable phrases/behaviour to a list, the players add unacceptable phrases/behvaiour to a list purposfully by using the reports, the list is made by players not by the staff and not by the system.
this was evident when the system was tested lol, it got abused so hard, many players understood how the system worked, so they could not remove the hand reviewing, they just downgraded the hand reviewing, this system is worse than the tribunal, at least at the tribunal incidents were looked at situational as well, they wanted to do in with the tribunal due to abuse by groups of players and bias towards certain players, this however is still happening.
Kei1431 votes[{quoted}](name=Devilreaper XIII,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=LMYoaoTH,comment-id=00020001000000030000,timestamp=2019-08-12T09:24:29.995+0000)
actually the other part is just as much an archive, the system does not learn, its driven by the community so if a certain amount of trolls decided that ''gg'' should be punishable, and they report players for saying ''gg'' the system will pick this up, it does so by saving the phrase ''gg'' and than crosschecking it with the amount of reports, and based on that it determines the severity of the punishment/feedback
That's learning ...
[slayer-jinx-unamused]
Infact, we used to think it works that way, but Riot Tantram has come here and clarified for us that they do use a AILM to keep the verbal system up to date.
I remember there was a post to clarify how the ML system worked. Can't ever find that post.
so again to make it clear, the system doesn't learn by adding unacceptable phrases/behaviour to a list, the players add unacceptable phrases/behvaiour to a list purposfully by using the reports, the list is made by players not by the staff and not by the system.
The ML system doesn't work off a list. It reads the whole paragraph and understands the context behind on whether the text was used as a form of harassment/ insult.
There's a reason why "report ahri no skin" is not punishable, but asking for reports when used to harass someone is punishable.
this was evident when the system was tested lol, it got abused so hard, many players understood how the system worked
Please give examples on how the ML system is abused. I know people try to get around the ZT system, but no one has ever managed to get around the ML system.
Also I see you quoting some old Jeffery Lin (Riot Lyte) post and stats about the system's accuracy.
Time you update yourself with new stats. The system now has a 0.010% rate of false positives. That includes player support dropping punishment tiers for first time offenders.
Devilreaper XIII1 votesThat's learning ...
[slayer-jinx-unamused]
Infact, we used to think it works that way, but Riot Tantram has come here and clarified for us that they do use a AILM to keep the verbal system up to date.
I remember there was a post to clarify how the ML system worked. Can't ever find that post.
can we please drop the AI..... anyhow, i don't think you know how simple a machine learning system is, it is absolutely nothing more but a software that stores data, and than crosschecks data, to come to a conclusion, it does NOT learn, what it does is collect data and predict, like i explained it stores phares/words/behaviour, and than crosschecks them with reports to determine what is or isn't toxic, aka its pathing and algorithms, all it does is INFORMATION GATHERING, the rest is algorithms, based on the info it gathered directly from the players, so even IF it actually isn't toxic it will still determine it being toxic IF the X amount of players reported it as toxic, thats how you get false positives.
The ML system doesn't work off a list. It reads the whole paragraph and understands the context behind on whether the text was used as a form of harassment/ insult.
There's a reason why "report ahri no skin" is not punishable, but asking for reports when used to harass someone is punishable.
again, it just crosschecks stored phrases, against reported phrases, no one, or barely anyone reports ''report ahri no skin'' so the system does not detect toxic behaviour because there is a lack of reports. it analyzes the paragraph yes, and than TAGS phrases/words that it can link to X amount of reports, however it does not determine by itself what is or isn't toxic..... the system does not think, its not terminator level [zombie-brand-facepalm]
Please give examples on how the ML system is abused. I know people try to get around the ZT system, but no one has ever managed to get around the ML system.
ok one more time here goes : the software stores reported phrases/words/behaviour, heck it even links words together like ''GG EASY'' so even if you type ''GG, although it wasn't EASY'' it could still result in punishment, however type ''GG EZ'' it won't result in punishment because there is no link, if the word ''GG'' itself isn't reported, there are players that go with a full premade team 6 players, lets say they play 100 matches and report the word ''GG'' thats 100 x 6 = 600 reports, lets say you need 500 reports in the least for it to become toxic, so the next one getting a report for ''GG'' will get a punishment, and yes its that easy, now change the algorithm to 500 reports from 500 different individuals and it gets less abused, but it can still get abused if there are 500 individual trolls reporting players for the same word/phrase/behaviour, so after the TOXIC has been established it takes only 1 report to get someone punsihed for saying ''GG'', i mentioned this way back, THIS is what the problem is with the software, the community decides what becomes toxic, the software just consists of pathings and algorithms, so it is DIRECTLY influenced by whatever the community decides to report, so if a big part (enough) of the community consists of trolls, the system gets abused, which happens even today, you see topics about unfair punishments, with words/phrases that aren't even toxic, triggered by a report.
Also I see you quoting some old Jeffery Lin (Riot Lyte) post and stats about the system's accuracy.
Time you update yourself with new stats. The system now has a 0.010% rate of false positives. That includes player support dropping punishment tiers for first time offenders.
i don't take such numbers serious unless raw data proofs it, but i can't dispute it either, not everyone comes to the boards to deal with unfair punishments, so whether that 0,010% rate of false positives is true or not is debateable.
Zlera2 votesCouple of thins could have happened.
- "Riot my filet" isnt a rioter.
- He had everyone muted
- The punishment is pending.
- He left the post game before all of that was said.
Blame me im jng1 votesYou can't have riot in your name unless you are a riotter. You literally CANNOT get the name with riot in it unless you work for them. 2. Riven didn't have everyone muted because she was talking to me in game chat. 3. We said what the fid did in game too not just post game. and 4. You know he won't be punished.
Zlera1 votes- You can add special characters among other things
- Well, fid was logically being toxic in team chat, not all
- Doesnt matter if you "told the rioter" what fiddle did, thats "he said she said"
- He will logically be punished. 4.1) It takes time
Blame me im jng1 votes
- You can add special characters among other things
- Well, fid was logically being toxic in team chat, not all
- Doesnt matter if you "told the rioter" what fiddle did, thats "he said she said"
- He will logically be punished. 4.1) It takes time
The system works within 15 minutes. It is almost like you don't know what you are talking about and just speak out of your ass.
Blame me im jng1 votesPlus he did speak in all chat.
ModPeriscope1 votesI’m pretty sure that’s a rioter. There have been times where players had Riot in their names, but it’s been a long time since that happened.
ModPeriscope2 votesHey, I removed your image for naming and shaming, which is against the board rules.
If you have questions regarding this, please reach out to us on discuss the boards or the boards discord.
Zlera1 votesIts possible he has been permad before and this is a new account or a bought bot account.
Kei1431 votesR%%%%% is currently not part of Riot's zero tolerance system. So it's will get punished, but it won't escalate quickly into 14-day bans and permabans.
Julevi1 votesPlease edit out the names as we have a "no name and shame" rule!
Devilreaper XIII1 votesPlease edited out the names as we have a "no name and shame" rule!
tell that to the staff.... when someone states the system doesnt work after they recieved punishment, some riot employee pops up to shame them without having any evidence.
Imperial Pandaa2 votesPlease share some links, I would be very curious to see a Red "shaming" a player that wasn't an OP claiming innocence. I've seen it happen one time and they Apologized to the poster.
Devilreaper XIII1 votes[{quoted}](name=Imperial Pandaa,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=LMYoaoTH,comment-id=000300000000,timestamp=2019-08-10T17:30:19.698+0000)
Please share some links, I would be very curious to see a Red "shaming" a player that wasn't an OP claiming innocence. I've seen it happen one time and they Apologized to the poster.
even if the TS claims to be innocent, thats no reason to claim otherwise by shaming them through sharing alleged info about their behaviour, most of these topics were about how much of a failure the system is and for some odd reason a software architect pops up to claim otherwise, here are some of them.
https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/E4LnThmW-most-ridiculous-chat-restriction-i-have-ever-seen-in-my-life?comment=0011 https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/KHAL90oW-stuck-at-honor-zero?comment=0003 https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/3jEVVlsY-permanently-banned-with-ingame-log?comment=003e https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/jFwTE8Oj-playing-off-meta-in-ranked-int-feeding-ban?comment=0039 https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/sU5wOfFJ-proof-that-the-automated-system-is-broken?show=rundown
they are still conducting this behaviour but in a more subtle matter, asking the TS if they can post it, or simply telling the TS their behaviour was unaccaptable without posting any content.
Imperial Pandaa1 votesI think this is the point where we may just have to agree to disagree.
In many of those links, simply going "We are right, you're wrong" wouldn't be a good idea. As for permission, I feel OPs give that permission by default when they make posts contesting a punishment. By creating that post on a Public Forum, they are granting permission fornothers to see and be involved. Similar to how Streamer Drama doesn't get removed for Name and Shame; they are considered public figures.
That said, if a Rioter made a post and called out every player that has ever been punished, I would agree that breaks Name Shame rule. Or if they posted info about someone other than the OP.
Thank you for the links though.
Devilreaper XIII1 votes[{quoted}](name=Imperial Pandaa,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=LMYoaoTH,comment-id=00030000000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-11T12:50:38.329+0000)
I think this is the point where we may just have to agree to disagree.
In many of those links, simply going "We are right, you're wrong" wouldn't be a good idea. As for permission, I feel OPs give that permission by default when they make posts contesting a punishment. By creating that post on a Public Forum, they are granting permission fornothers to see and be involved. Similar to how Streamer Drama doesn't get removed for Name and Shame; they are considered public figures.
That said, if a Rioter made a post and called out every player that has ever been punished, I would agree that breaks Name Shame rule. Or if they posted info about someone other than the OP.
Thank you for the links though.
no problem.
there is a universal code of conduct that even riot staff has to abide by, they set rules that state NO naming and shaming by ANYONE, a staff member which task it is to write software should not be breaking that very rule when he/she is OUTSIDE their tasked jobs shaming players by ALLEGEDLY posting punishments/feedback that SAID player didn't get or should not get, or have been refused that info even between mail correspondence, on the topic made by said player?
even IF that player agrees/gives permission to it being posted on the boards, the staff is still not allowed to post it since it breaks the universal code of conduct.....
with that said, the riot staff member is an software writer at that, why has a software writer even access to such info? and is what this software writer posts credible and legit? there is no way of checking it,and there is no riot employee with a job including the task to discuss feedback/punishments that provides evidence at such topics, therefor it IS an attempt to shame the TS, riot staff are not allowed to discuss such matters in such details on the boards, it is not the purpose of the boards, that is why PRIVATE mail exist.
it also happens to be the software architect that wrote the automated system, its just a case of pride, where the staff member is defending the system he/she wrote.
now if the TS posts mail correspondence than yes that is discussable, since the TS itself is posting it, not in an attempt to shame anyone, but only what the TS has posted, not any other info is allowed to be discussed.
the ''no naming and shaming'' rule is about tying players to info that could discredit them, you can discuss said info all you want as long as you do not tie a name to such info.
the better way to deal with such topics would be to, set a rule that states players aren't allowed to discuss their feedback/punishments on the boards (unless there is no other option and the helpdesk employee is less than helpful, other employee on the boards could look into that, but thats a bit offtopic), and closing/removing such topics rather than to DISCREDIT said TS, or am i being to ethical?
heres another link, 7 months ago, https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/mfIbceyR-permbanned-riot-refuses-to-provide-anything-about-previous-2-week-ban?comment=00000000000000000000 the staff member has a changed demeanor if you ask me, notice how the title ARCHITECT is missing from his/her name? either a demotion, or they reshaped their teams, i have no idea what role he/she has inside the company anymore, but i doubt discussing said system and feedback/punishment is a part of it, since he/she stated doing desk work now, and not having much time to be on the boards.
Illabethe1 votesThat kind of chat is not okay with Riot and will eventually be punished. However, it's not always as expedient as report hunters such as yourself wish it was.
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