Boards›Player Behavior

Riot, Easter, Light and Tyler1

HeYoo·5/1/2016, 12:07:01 AM·1 votes·1,292 views

Hello everyone, I'm not a Tyler supporter, I'm a justice supporter and I'm here to say that Riot should better define the rules about "trolling", "afk", "intentional feeding" and leaving the game. I've never been banned, I've been warned because I've raged quit a couple of times, sometimes is impossible to play with a losing team (or is not fun). What Riot did I find unacceptable: "taking a guy that is seen by a portion of people as <evil> and executing him in front of everyone" like a criminal ( Eugen Weidmann - the last public exection France), after all Riot is owned by a Chinese company (psst Chinise government still executes people on a daily basis). I believe we've outgrown that type of behaviour and we are better than our parents or grand-parents (we were the ones to civilize the rest of the world <Roman Empire>). From my understanding Tyler1 had more than 15 accounts perma banned, this means he was reported or he was hunted down. I'm a supporter of free speech, and I believe that if one says "go kill yourself" over a video game that should be acceptable ( one has the "mute" button that can restrict his speech, sort of safe zone). The solution that Riot has presented to us, to ban an individual that has commited the same "crime" over and over again will not solve the problem, is not a solution, but is a patch to the problem (we all know he will come back, he will be reanimated by someone else, until Hitler<Riot> has eliminated every non-aryan). Riot should make the game start on mute everyone, so that no one should be forced to listen to anyone (prohibiting free speech); Riot should unban the individual that caused all the mess (not only one account, but all of them); Riot should ban on the spot everyone that uses words like: gay, %%%got, %%%%%% or any pejorativ word that might offend someone; Riot should listen to everyone, not just to a portion of people (I'm not here to talk about the drama between Meteo and Tyler1, because in the world of "League of Legends" we are all equal; With this I finalize my little protestation against perma-banning people and banning indefinetly.

Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_hunt_(disambiguation) http://www.riotgames.com/tags/tencent https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwV_0HmQkRrTcrReaMxPeDw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugen_Weidmann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_race https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire

6 Comments

TheSequelsRBad5/1/2016, 12:24:48 AM2 votes

The problem with posts like this, is that Riot is going to do what they want. It doesn't matter if you or anyone else agrees with Riot's system, they won't change it to suit you.

Also, the majority is content with the system in place.

Billy VoHagen5/1/2016, 12:31:13 AM1 votes

He did intentionally feed in games and Afk though. And they didn't ban him from playing the game, all they effectively did was ban him from streaming because it promoted toxicity. Even if there is another Challenger Elo Draven only player, they can't really prove its him (unless they compared IP addresses, I guess)

EndGamer115/1/2016, 4:39:39 AM1 votes

{quoted}

Riot should better define the rules about &quot;trolling&quot;, &quot;afk&quot;, &quot;intentional feeding&quot; and leaving the game.

Trolling is messing around in a way that purposefully messes with other players: see also Int. Feeding, AFK, etc. AFK is leaving the game or computer for significant enough time that the game is affected, ex: Leaving for 10 minutes to warm up a burrito, ragequits. Intentional feeding is feeding intentionally. Leaving the game is leaving the game.

I&#039;ve been warned because I&#039;ve raged quit a couple of times, sometimes is impossible to play with a losing team (or is not fun).

Is this relevant to the discussion? Either way, even if the game in progress is "not fun", it is your obligation to play to the nexus explosion.

What Riot did I find unacceptable: &quot;taking a guy that is seen by a portion of people as &lt;evil&gt; and executing him in front of everyone&quot; like a criminal ( Eugen Weidmann - the last public execution France)

Comparing an unpleasant character getting banned from a f2p game with an execution? Well, I'll concede that it was pretty savage :P Besides, Death Row is still a thing.

after all Riot is owned by a Chinese company (psst Chinise government still executes people on a daily basis).

How is this relevant? Is it a weak Ad Hom attempt?

I believe we&#039;ve outgrown that type of behaviour and we are better than our parents or grand-parents (we were the ones to civilize the rest of the world &lt;Roman Empire&gt;)

If the behavior we are talking about is throwing a tantrum when "the corki gets the buff instead of me waah", then I agree completely. how childish. Also, what's with the random Roman Empire stuff? If you are implying that the RE "civilized" places like China, South Africa, and South America...

From my understanding Tyler1 had more than 15 accounts perma banned, this means he was reported or he was hunted down. I&#039;m a supporter of free speech, and I believe that if one says &quot;go kill yourself&quot; over a video game that should be acceptable ( one has the &quot;mute&quot; button that can restrict his speech, sort of safe zone).

Unfortunately, the community at large does not think the same way. Death threats have been voted by the community to be toxic, therefore they are not allowed in LoL. Side note, 1st Amendment does not apply to private buisnesses setting rules for their establishments, only to government.

The solution that Riot has presented to us, to ban an individual that has commited the same &quot;crime&quot; over and over again will not solve the problem, is not a solution, but is a patch to the problem (we all know he will come back, he will be reanimated by someone else, until Hitler&lt;Riot&gt; has eliminated every non-aryan).

The issue was that Tyler set a bad example. He showed people that it was alright to be toxic, when Riot disagreed. He then added on some ban dodging by mass-creating accounts (even illegally buying some), along with AFK and Int Feed charges. Much like a fine establishment shoos away heroin addicts from their storefronts, so did Riot shoo away Tyler from the public eye. Again, clever and unique Hitler comparison, it really adds to the legitimacy of your argument.

Riot should make the game start on mute everyone, so that no one should be forced to listen to anyone (prohibiting free speech);

Players can turn off chat or /mute all themselves. Riot does not need to inconvenience the many for the good of the few. See above for more info on why the Free Speech argument is invalid here.

Riot should unban the individual that caused all the mess (not only one account, but all of them);

Tyler is a detriment to the community, and, like a bruised apple, has been removed from the bag so that the other apples do not get sticky and gross.

Riot should ban on the spot everyone that uses words like: gay, %%%got, %%%%%% or any pejorative word that might offend someone;

Riot already heavily punishes hate speech, and its current weight in the system is fine.

Riot should listen to everyone, not just to a portion of people (I&#039;m not here to talk about the drama between Meteo and Tyler1, because in the world of &quot;League of Legends&quot; we are all equal;

The current banning system recognizes report patters to identify what the majority thinks is punishable.

With this I finalize my little protestation against perma-banning people and banning indefinetly.

Sometimes it is better to amputate before disease spreads. Alas, such measures are necessary for extreme cases like Tyler and XJ9.