Giving up and Greifing

MrGoldDucky666·Apr 26, 2018·1 votes·3,358 views

I'd like to make a complaint to Riot. For awhile know I have been slowly climbing my way up in Silver and have had a pleasant time with some teams even when we lose, but there has been a reoccurring factor that has been causing my games to be the least, most uninteresting, most frustrating, and aggravating in my games. I'm talking about the people who halfway in the game, even if we are winning, give up and start feeding the enemy team. These sociopolitical players are being found again and again in my games. If it didn't happen that often, I wouldn't bother you about this, but the sheer amount of time it has happened has made me feel like you are not stepping up to the task of dealing with these players. If you read this, please tell me you are doing something, cuz it feels like your giving the community a middle finger on this one.

32 Comments

Ph03n1xdustApr 26, 20182 votes

They simpy dont give a fck about it, get used to it. But do not dare to say a word to them, cuz the permaban is comin'!

SEKAIApr 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

They simpy dont give a fck about it, get used to it. But do not dare to say a word to them, cuz the permaban is comin'!

Thanks for the fearmongering, we're in desperate need of those seeing that we don't get enough from news programs and social media.

Ph03n1xdustApr 26, 20183 votes

[deleted]

SEKAIApr 26, 20182 votes

{quoted}

[DELETED CONTENT REMOVED]

Self proclaimed facts are not facts, that's just your opinion. Opinions can't be wrong, but they can still be based on falsehoods.

If you flame a troll, you get banned because you're flaming yourself, and flaming is still just flaming. You're not suddenly above the rule just because someone wronged first, especially not when self defence doesn't apply here since no one is at any immediate mortal danger at the hands of another player. There is nothing unjust in there.

...

EDIT: And I'm pretty sure by "And if you are "feared" by getting banned if you flame a troll, idk what to say to you." you probably either don't understand what "fearmongering" means, or you'd expressed whatever you wanted to say extremely badly, given that line literally doesn't make sense as a response to my reply. Though I took and wild stab in the dark and assumed you meant something along the lines that one shouldn't be banned for flaming a troll.

Ph03n1xdustApr 26, 20182 votes

Since trolls are not banned (or very rarely), this proves that Rito doesn't care about this problem enough. And we know that players are gettin' banned for flaming trolls. Both things are facts.

If not for the naming shaming rule i could show you 6 tear players not getting punished (not bought only in last minute). Fearmongering would need that i'm exaggerating the facts, yet i am not.

SEKAIApr 26, 20182 votes

{quoted}

Since trolls are not banned (or very rarely), this proves that Rito doesn't care about this problem enough. And we know that players are gettin' banned for flaming trolls. Both things are facts.

If not for the naming shaming rule i could show you 6 tear players not getting punished (not bought only in last minute). Fearmongering would need that i'm exaggerating the facts, yet i am not.

Yeah, let us keep on simultaneously complaining about Riot banning too much people and banning too less people, often at the same time because use whichever and whenever it's convenient for our narratives, like business as usual.

Also, flaming trolls are supposed to get you banned, because it's still flaming. As I was saying, you're not above the rule because of someone's wrongdoing; and since you can not pose mortal danger to another player like conventional assault or murder etc, League therefore also has no consideration for self defence, and you are not allowed to flame back when flamed, as otherwise it would be enabling toxicity itself while supposedly trying to control toxicity which is both contradictory and doesn't work.

Moreover, inting takes a while to ban because it needs enough history to set up a profile of pattern for the basis of behavioural check. Which obviously takes far longer than string matching such in the case of scanning through chatlogs. Not to mention, I'm pretty sure 6 tears (not the troll buying it at the last minute) get banned rather quickly because they basically just hard-coded it into the IFS, and most forms of blatant inting gets detected in mostly timely manner; it's really only the soft-ints that the system has issues with, understandably so.

And since you're obviously exaggerating the facts, so you're fearmongering even in your own words.

Ph03n1xdustApr 26, 20182 votes

[DELETED BY MODERATION], so probably this will be my last reply to you in this matter.

You can complain for banning too much and not enough people FOR THE DIFFERENT REASONS. I do not even know why you wrote this, that fckin makes no sense.

I can get behind to ban flamers(still don't know why a chat restriction is not enough, but whatever...) IF(only IF) they would ban the root of the flaming as well (the trolls). Most of the flamers I encountered (not statistic, just experience) flamed TROLLS, and not random players. So i find it a little bit unfair, that a troll can ruin whatever games it likes and get banned a lot of people during this time, while he goes unpunished. Yes, checking for 6 tears is literally the hardest imaginable problem for the humanity (little exaggeration here). Also they could rely more on player reports if they suck at building a system for this.

I don't know where did i exaggerate but, whatever makes you sleep better -_-

SEKAIApr 26, 20182 votes

{quoted}

[DELETED CONTENT REMOVED BY MODERATION], so probably this will be my last reply to you in this matter.

You can complain for banning too much and not enough people FOR THE DIFFERENT REASONS. I do not even know why you wrote this, that fckin makes no sense.

Yeah I suppose they only ban innocent players and intentionally leave out the toxic ones too. Clearly that doesn't sound contrived at all.

I can get behind to ban flamers(still don't know why a chat restriction is not enough, but whatever...) IF(only IF) they would ban the root of the flaming as well (the trolls). Most of the flamers I encountered (not statistic, just experience) flamed TROLLS, and not random players. So i find it a little bit unfair, that a troll can ruin whatever games it likes and get banned a lot of people during this time, while he goes unpunished. Yes, checking for 6 tears is literally the hardest imaginable problem for the humanity (little exaggeration here). Also they could rely more on player reports if they suck at building a system for this.

I don't know where did i exaggerate but, whatever makes you sleep better -_-

And trolls do get banned?

What makes you think players trolling is not subjected to the same treatment of another trolling/flaming the troll when overseen under the same (mostly) automatic feedback system?

And as I was saying, behavioural checks takes longer to do than string checks by nature. It's the same how it's faster to pinpoint someone being a criminal if there is a written evidence or manifesto that leads the cops to them than having the cops chase around small indirectly related circumstantial evidences to form an accurately enough picture to locate the culprit. It's unavoidable. But then again, as I've also said, the system doesn't really have much issues with blatant inting (6 tears running down mid is something that's usually banned away rather quickly; the issue is mostly external to the punishment system on this where many people create troll smurfs to troll and int with so even if they're successfully banned after the very first offence, it still means absolutely nothing), only soft ints run into issues.

EDIT: Also, the IFS system employs machine learning, it adapts to what players are reporting or at least attempts to (out of a few "zero tolerance" cases where Riot hard-code into the system itself, most of what the system knows about what a player should or shouldn't do is based on analysing player reports and past cases from the retired Tribunal). So yes, they do rely on player reports.

Arisha the DarkApr 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

I don't really know why am i arguing with somebody who lacks basic logic, so probably this will be my last reply to you in this matter.

You can complain for banning too much and not enough people FOR THE DIFFERENT REASONS. I do not even know why you wrote this, that fckin makes no sense.

I can get behind to ban flamers(still don't know why a chat restriction is not enough, but whatever...) IF(only IF) they would ban the root of the flaming as well (the trolls). Most of the flamers I encountered (not statistic, just experience) flamed TROLLS, and not random players. So i find it a little bit unfair, that a troll can ruin whatever games it likes and get banned a lot of people during this time, while he goes unpunished. Yes, checking for 6 tears is literally the hardest imaginable problem for the humanity (little exaggeration here). Also they could rely more on player reports if they suck at building a system for this.

I don't know where did i exaggerate but, whatever makes you sleep better -_-

What both you and SEKAI don't understand is that system does not take longer to ban intentional feeders and trolls, it's just people do that more rarely. The thing here is that system punishes people for being consistently toxic/inting/trolling. So lets say if you flame and get reported for flaming in every 3rd match you play out of 30 matches you played, you get banned. You flame often and don't improve.

Now lets say you flame once every 10 games. You might still get banned, but most likely won't, because it's not frequent enough.

Now lets look at people who inting/trolling. Most people who do it, won't do it more then once in 5-10 matches, so it is harder for system to realise, these people are toxic consistently. Remember, being toxic once in a while Is OK? And it's extremely rare that someone would int/troll every second match.

So no, the reason inters/trolls get banned rarely, Is because you can't compare inting/trolling to flaming. Two absolutely different things. Like saying idiots who start fights in bars getting caught more often than professional killers, means justice system is a failure! It does not.

Ph03n1xdustApr 26, 20181 votes

You are just simply wrong.

You DO GET banned for dropping ONE "kys" or "%%%%%%" in the game. And you also get banned (you don't, because the system is shit, but in theory you should) by the FIRST occurrence of inting, according to the multiple threads. None of these behaviors have to be consistent.

Also, on a different account i troll every 2nd 3rd match (only soft inting), just to test the system (around gold elo). And NO, i did not get banned even for CONSISTENT inting.

EDIT: The %%%%% is how african americans refer to each other.

ModUlanopoMay 4, 20181 votes

Good evening,

I have edited out the unnecessary insult. Please remember to be respectful of other posters at all times.

If you have questions or concerns about this action, please come to the Moderation Discord or create a discussion on Discuss the Boards.

~ Ulanopo

VenompawApr 26, 20181 votes

Please tell me that you don't think dying = feeding.

ChermorgApr 26, 20183 votes

To be fair, dying is feeding.

But feeding isn't inherently bad, only when intentional.

MrGoldDucky666Apr 26, 20181 votes

its when people start the act of not doing anything but running alone into the enemy team and then they say stuff like "GG open mid" when the rest of the team is actually trying.

MrGoldDucky666Apr 26, 20181 votes

I actually dont understand this mentality

MrGoldDucky666Apr 26, 20181 votes

and it is the most toxic thing you can do in this game

ChermorgApr 26, 20182 votes

Have you considered maybe you are giving them the vibe (or someone is) that you're going to follow? And then you don't?

Many times, misunderstandings like this result from poor communication between all members of a team.

MrGoldDucky666Apr 26, 20181 votes

it happens a lot when they are alone, or they could have saved themselves, and then just blame others for thier mistakes

MrGoldDucky666Apr 26, 20181 votes

it cant be me if they do it when no one si there and they repeat it through out the game

Ph03n1xdustApr 26, 20181 votes

Goood ol' Chergmog trying to blame the actual guy, who did nothing wrong and defending the trolls :3

I missed this! :D

VenompawApr 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

To be fair, dying is feeding.

But feeding isn't inherently bad, only when intentional.

Dying without a cause is feeding. You can't expect a perfect KDA every game.

SEKAIApr 26, 20181 votes

Bronze and Silver alone account for about 80% of the playerbase, and Silver has more players than Bronze. Ofc you run into asshats often, because there are more people here and thus more asshats.

Ph03n1xdustApr 26, 20181 votes

Just because there are more people, that doesn't imply that the % of asshats are bigger in silver. Your logic fails here. (Since, just because you play in silver you do NOT meet with more people)

SEKAIApr 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Just because there are more people, that doesn't imply that the % of asshats are bigger in silver. Your logic fails here. (Since, just because you play in silver you do NOT meet with more people)

wat.

So let's assume the asshats represent equal percentages within their elo brackets for a start (I just assume it's uniform here, let's not go into assuming which elo is less or more toxic given I wouldn't think there are not that much intrinsic difference). The sheer fact there are far more players in low elo means there will be more asshat players in their ranks; 1% out of 100 is 1, and 1% out of 10000 is 100, get it(?). And since you're gonna get matched with 9 other players no matter what, assuming you're soloing your way, ofc under this same fixed parameters while there are significantly more raw numbers of asshats on the loose, ofc you run into them more often.

Where does that logic supposedly fail again?

Arisha the DarkApr 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

wat.

So let's assume the asshats represent equal percentages within their elo brackets for a start (I just assume it's uniform here, let's not go into assuming which elo is less or more toxic given I wouldn't think there are not that much intrinsic difference). The sheer fact there are far more players in low elo means there will be more asshat players in their ranks; 10% out of 100 is 10, and 10% out of 500 is 50, get it(?). And since you're gonna get matched with 9 other players no matter what, assuming you're soloing your way, ofc under this same fixed parameters while there are significantly more raw numbers of asshats on the loose, ofc you run into them more often.

Where does that logic supposedly fail again?

Unfortunately, while I usually wouldn't agree with person you are replying to, on anything about this game, right now you are the one who is wrong.

While you are right that there would be more asshats, you completely ignore that there will be equally more good players. If there are 10% asshats and 90% good players, no matter the total amount of players, % chance of meeting asshats vs good players will remain the same.

SEKAIApr 26, 20181 votes

[{quoted}](name=Arisha the Dark,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=M4J6GdFE,comment-id=0002000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-26T11:20:12.858+0000)

Unfortunately, while I usually wouldn't agree with person you are replying to, on anything about this game, right now you are the one who is wrong.

While you are right that there would be more asshats, you completely ignore that there will be equally more good players. If there are 10% asshats and 90% good players, no matter the total amount of players, % chance of meeting asshats vs good players will remain the same.

{quoted}

Okay, lets say, you play 100 games, meet with 900 people in BOTH ELOs.

In silver 1% of people are asshats --> you met 9 asshats. In diamond 1% of people are asshats -> you met 9 asshats.

This is where you are wrong, genius!

You could be ONLY right, if you claimed that silver is the most toxic division, which i have no idea of, since i don't play there.

I don't really know what's the term for this, but I personally call it the "looking from the outside vs looking from the inside". Let's assume League's elos are different cities, and its trolls and griefers as criminals on the loose, where each elo "city" has the same amount of criminal percentages out of their population; if you look from the outside, a person my any city has the same amount of rate of being attacked by a criminal, because each city has the same criminal to total population ratio, but if you look from the inside from an individual's point of view, you'd think that individuals from more populated areas are probably more exposed to danger because there are more flat numbers of criminals on the loose and so one can easily argue the chances of encounter is also therefore higher. I do not know what is the resolution to this kind of things, maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong.

But then again, I typed it out as a simplified case to begin with. The reason for that is because:

Asshats don't exist in a vacuum. Their victims are just as likely to become asshats themselves, even just temporarily.

When there is a higher number of asshats, they produce a higher number of victims, and those victims by extension are also a part of the asshats' influence themselves, temporarily or not, and so higher number of asshats automatically mean a faster spreading "epidemic of toxicity". On this basis, more asshats do have an edge, because the toxicity you face is far more likely to be of greater chance than other elos of smaller populations, even if the percentage of actually toxic-to-the-core players are uniform across all elos.

KarunamonApr 26, 20181 votes

The problem is that Silver is wildly inconsistent. You have a smattering of legitimate newbies, smurfs, permabanned people on new purchased accounts..

Note that all but one of those things will cause shitty games.

Ph03n1xdustApr 26, 20181 votes

Okay, lets say, you play 100 games, meet with 900 people in BOTH ELOs.

In silver 1% of people are asshats --> you met 9 asshats. In diamond 1% of people are asshats -> you met 9 asshats.

This is where you are wrong, genius!

You could be ONLY right, if you claimed that silver is the most toxic division, which i have no idea of, since i don't play there.

bloodisondiamondApr 26, 20181 votes

[deleted]

SEKAIApr 26, 20181 votes

You can just hop on OPGG and copy any top player's build from any given champion, if you're really that desperate. I fail to see it's even worth risking installing a program that interacts with the League client, which in turn risks getting banned for 3rd party program related reasons (the client may or may not interpret it as scripts).

Also, just so you know, you shouldn't share accounts with another player. It's included under one of the bannable offence in League (it's there because Riot doesn't want account sharing people to be meddling with the system's hunt on boosters, given they look the same; and since creating account is free and able to be terminated at any time as long as you request the support team anyway so players should just do that instead of sharing accounts with another player).

Twilit AngelApr 26, 20181 votes

Yeah... I have no idea. I was on a winning streak and got to Silver 2 and I had Gold V MMR, but now I'm back down to Silver 4 from being paired with these toxic people who just give up too often.

This one game, my mid laner threatened to afk if people kept dying on our team. He did. The score was only 0 v 4. My support Zyra got caught by Leona and there was nothing I could do to save her. I already used heal to save her before, but she just kept walking too close to Leo every time.

Another game was just dumb. Had a Soraka afk on me saying, "Hold on I'm rolling a blunt," then walked up to lane too far to get instantly jumped on since they were level 1 while everyone was about level 4, then proceeded to be toxic to me and not support me at all.

MrGoldDucky666Apr 28, 20181 votes

To tell you the truth, I did not think this would get this much publicity in 1 day, but I am glad that people are talking about this subject because it NEEDS to be addressed. Wither I am in the right to point out that its not a singular instance but people actually inting to get the game over (because they think the game is lost) or i'm in the wrong because i'm initialing the toxicity towards the troll, I very much enjoy that people have listened. Thank you