Boards›Player Behavior

One Extra Punishment Step

Imperial Pandaa·1/6/2019, 9:32:46 PM·12 votes·11,646 views

I know Riot did their data thing back with the results that by x punishments, it is shown that player will not reform. I get that, I really do, and my suggestion isn't really for the "typical" punished player. More like an unexpected perk to those going through the standard tier list: 10 game CR 25 game CR 14 day ban Perm.

My suggestion is more for those punished for ZT who of course skip the CRs.

>Add a second 14 day ban before the perm.

That is the idea and I'll go ahead and address some of the concerns that I feel will be brought up.

"Why add the extra step when Riot already has the data showing extra steps won't help?" Simply because, and do not mistake that I support toxicity, a ZT phrase jumps you to the end and doesn't allow for a much less toxic mistake per se. Maybe Joe got the 14 day for ZT and when he came back; made the mistake of report calling and saying that his team was iron level. He would hopefully realize the mistake with ZT. Now it is lesser toxicity he may noy be aware he is commiting. A new 14 day could be applied instead of a perm and hopefully teach that is also not okay.

"Why should people who commit a ZT offense be able to get a second 14 day by commiting another?" They wouldn't. After a 14 day ban, using a ZT would skip the 2nd and result in a perm. I understand going from high(ZT) to low, but not from low to high (ZT).

"Why should those who go through with consistent toxicity get the second 14 day?" Honestly, I don't care if they do. I just figured it would be easier on the system to not have competing ladders for the same offense (as Gameplay and Verbal are on two different ladders).

"I don't think verbal toxicity should be punished at all." I respect your opinion, but I am not here to talk about what should and should not be punishable. Just here to suggest an idea to maybe help with reform.

Anyone like to weigh in yheir thoughts?

30 Comments

ModUlanopo1/6/2019, 11:04:30 PM3 votes

I'm not against it, but I am doubtful of the value. How many people do we imagine or out there that said something that was genuinely deserving of a ZT escalation, but then got hit with a perma on the basis of behavior that otherwise would have only merited a much less strict punishment?

If your theory is that the ZT use was out of obliviousness, why do you not expect them to not otherwise be routinely toxic?

R107 Games1/6/2019, 9:41:09 PM2 votes

To this day riot still doesn't say in their ToS that encouragement of self harm/ hate speech is zero tolerance. And saying anything zero tolerance is a 14 day ban.

I just want riot to say what is zero tolerance in their ToS, so players can avoid bans.

Fegone1/7/2019, 9:55:48 PM2 votes

Nope. There's enough 2nd chances already. No further babysitting for the whining crybabies.

Umbral Regent1/6/2019, 9:47:37 PM2 votes

I personally think that a second 14-day for ZT-offenders would probably be a decent change - but, only about that far. I know you weren't the one who initially seeded the thought for me to mull over (and for the one who did - discussion rival of mine, I'd like to properly credit you, if that's alright), but between you and them, I do agree that the situation of a first-time-ZT-offender-going-on-light-offender would probably require a little extra leniency.

It was a little hard for me to get over the initial hump with the concept for my adamance against toxicity, but, it does seem like a fair few people unfortunately don't make a big enough step down in their behavior once they get punished for a ZT offense, oblivious to the litany of lighter offenses that could be committed that - to them - seem perfectly normal in League.

The worst of us takes more than we expect to tame, so, all told, I'm in favor of at least giving the worst offenders just one more chance, provided they don't make the same mistakes twice.

Fermi Paradox1/6/2019, 9:36:04 PM2 votes

I voted yes, but that does not mean Skyrim doesn't belong to the Nords...

....just to clarify this! >:(

ZaFishbone1/7/2019, 2:11:22 PM1 votes

Ahh yes, toxic people trying to get less lenient punishment, AWESOME! Is it really SO hard to try to be a better human being? To just hot mute all? I'm sick and tired of hearing people justify themselves by complaining about being "trapped" with a feeder for 20-30 mins, you SIGNED UP for this when you clicked that Find Match button. You aren't going to always get the perfect teammates and the essence of climbing is being able to influence the game on your own, not by relying on others.

Jojobees1/9/2019, 9:58:55 PM1 votes

Upvoted. Though I believe it should be something more like a 1 year ban. Something serious to prepare you for perm ban. Personally it took me almost 3 years to reform, and my account is perm banned because of it.

Because let's be honest. A 2 week ban is nowhere near a perm ban. When I received my two week bans, I never took them seriously.

DemainaNyx1/10/2019, 1:48:43 AM1 votes

For a Zero Tolerance case, I think that makes sense.

Sometimes people argue in chat and they seem to think that's an ok thing to do. I even had a teammate tell me, "I was having a conversation with him, not you. if you don't like us talking, mute us." They also seemed to think it was ok because "I did more damage than you anyway." They weren't saying anything out right horrible, but stuff like "are you even human?", "you humanoid", "you have a micro dick", "tiny dick loser", etc. The thing was more they did it from the first minion wave spawn to the end of the game. So I reported them after the game because they were just distracting the entire time and insulting each other. We couldn't use pings cause they ? pinged each other. We couldn't use chat because they were talking all the time.

So if one of these players had just had a 14 day ban and then had a match like this where nothing was outright horrible but just more frustrating to deal with, they might be banned for what they think is completely fine behavoir.

At least by having another ban phase it gives them one more chance in cases like above where nothing the second time was zero tolerance but rather something that generally wouldn't be punished that hard or at all.

Zardo1/6/2019, 9:42:37 PM1 votes

I think there should either be a 3 day - 1 week ban between the chat restriction and 3 week or a month ban after, maybe both.

Jerry SeinfeId1/6/2019, 10:21:53 PM1 votes

honestly i think the triggerwords (if that's what you mean by ZT) are incredibly bad practice. Not to mention how unclear the system is.

I have been told good behaviour lowers you on the "ladder" to a perma ban, but i have yet to see confirmation about that from a rioter.

anyway the thing about triggerwords is that they are just that words. often not even words and how offensive they are is quite subjective. And most importantly there's no clear list of them. And you can say "if you ain't toxic you won't need a list" and sure, but how can someone follow rules that are nowhere to be found.

for example, one of my schools locations has a no smoking zone outside. None of the others do, the one i get 95% of my classes at doesn't for example. But if they didn't put up the little signs and someone lights a cigarette, being instantly expelled for it would be silly.

Unless we can see what can and can't be said you shouldn't be skipping any punishment.

Mcsquzzy1/7/2019, 2:23:39 AM1 votes

Honest question, in the 14 day ban notification people receive does it mention that the next step is perma ban.

I don't think it should change anything, whether it is or not. I am just curious.

AJStarhiker1/7/2019, 2:37:05 AM1 votes

I've disliked the 14 to perma since day 1. It doesn't give the offender enough timr to prove they've learned.

However, I'd probably either make the first offense a 1-week or the second offense a 1-month, if only to make it easier to tell which punishment tier it is.