Why bans instead of permanent chat restrictions?

AllMostOliver·Aug 9, 2016·5 votes·5,035 views

I'd like to preface this by stating that I did just receive a 14-day ban however that has not changed or formed this opinion/question.

I was just wondering why toxic players such as myself receive a 14-day or permanent ban as supposed to a permanent chat restriction. Obviously toxicity is poor and frowned upon but if you completely remove the player's ability to type/limit it to 1 message every however long it is, I don't see why there needs to be a punishment as harshly as permanently banning someone.

Any information on why there are bans over chat restriction would be greatly appreciated.

80 Comments

AstôlfoAug 9, 20167 votes

Because 1, toxic players don't deserve to play at all, and 2, a chat restriction means they can just feed or otherwise troll game-wise instead.

obsesseAug 9, 20165 votes

Well that doesn't sound right. Toxic players will just make new accounts and continue to play. And continue to play. And continue to play. Banning doesn't stop that. Permanently restricting chat is a rather clever solution for players who are consistently punished for abusing chat privileges, though.

Really, it seems that the answer no one is willing to offer is that Riot benefits more from players making brand new accounts than they do from real player reform.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

Yes but then they have to start from scratch.

Uh, they gave people multiple chances of reform. The fact they got to a ban/permaban in the first place means they obviously can't reform.

obsesseAug 9, 20161 votes

Yes but then they have to start from scratch.

You seemed to have missed the point, bud. Our goal is to reduce toxic player behavior, and League is a free game. Banning an account does not make someone less toxic, if anything they will be pissed off and go on a rampage.

So again, how does banning IN ANY WAY accomplish your dumbass point #1?

If someone is verbally abusive, the problem isn't their gameplay. It's the fact that they are verbally abusive. Limit THAT and see what happens. If they feed or find another way to troll then the system will take care of them, right?

Or should we just execute people as soon as they break any law since they can't reform?

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

Good for them, they can be pissed off all they want. Their feelings are irrelevant. And they're not going to go on a rampage without an account. And on the chance they try to make a new account and rampage/troll on that, they're going to find themselves permabanned a second time fairly quickly.

Also, a chat ban doesn't reduce toxic player behavior. There's a 4 strike system to disencourage said behavior and allow at a chance of reform. If they ignore them all, that's their fault and they deserve to lose everything. Also, the vast majority of players have never been given so much as a chat restriction.

No need to flame.

obsesseAug 9, 20163 votes

Good for them, they can be pissed off all they want.

Except when they abuse new players at lower levels, right? Or do their feelings not matter either?

And they're not going to go on a rampage without an account. And on the chance they try to make a new account and rampage/troll on that, they're going to find themselves permabanned a second time fairly quickly.

Really? How do you know that? Do you have a single statistic to back up your claim? My guess is no, and you are talking out of your ass. And even if they are permabanned again, they can continue to play and harass new players. This does NOTHING. The whole point of preventing toxic behavior isn't to punish toxic players, it's to protect innocent players from being harassed in the first place. You are much too focused on the punishment mindset which leads me to believe you are a toxic little fucker.

Also, a chat ban doesn't reduce toxic player behavior. There's a 4 strike system to disencourage said behavior and allow at a chance of reform.

Then what is the fucking point if it doesn't reduce toxic behavior???????????

Honestly, your views on the subject seem vastly uninformed. Your attitudes towards negative player behavior seem rash, impractical, and illogical in general.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

Uh, there will always be toxic people and the system will never be perfect. What's your point? It's better than letting said toxic players continue playing, which they don't deserve. And, surprise surprise, after getting permabanned a few times, or even once, most people lose the motivation to keep playing and trying again. Why? Because they obviously can't change their behavior and will get permabanned again fairly quickly. So why bother?

Because them remaking an account is a smurf of sorts and smurf detection systems are very good?

Toxic behavior will never be completely erasable.

Alright bud. Coming from someone like you, your opinions really aren't relevant in the slightest.

obsesseAug 9, 20162 votes

It's better than letting said toxic players continue playing, which they don't deserve.

TOXIC PLAYERS? I think really what you mean is verbally abusive players, since you can have your account banned permanently simply for what you type in chat. This is absurd to me. Their crime is what they type, so why are they getting punished past that? You may argue that verbally abusive players also do other toxic things, and I definitely agree, but until they do let's focus on their actual behavior. If someone is verbally abusive then punish them for that. If someone feeds intentionally then punish them for that. BUT DO NOT SAY THAT ALL TOXIC PLAYERS ARE EQUAL OR THAT VERBALLY ABUSIVE PLAYERS CAN BE HANDLED THE EXACT SAME WAY AS INTENTIONAL FEEDERS.

And, surprise surprise, after getting permabanned a few times, or even once, most people lose the motivation to keep playing and trying again. Why? Because they obviously can't change their behavior and will get permabanned again fairly quickly.

You just pulled this directly from your asshole. You have NO IDEA, right? You just thought this and typed it.

If you have any reason to actually think this, please provide the links.

Because them remaking an account is a smurf of sorts and smurf detection systems are very good?

One more time, how do you know this? Seriously. Are you just assuming that's the way it is?

Uh, there will always be toxic people and the system will never be perfect. What's your point?

Has my point really been that unclear? MY POINT IS THAT WE ARE NOT DOING A GOOD ENOUGH JOB AND WE COULD DO BETTER.

TrulyBlandAug 9, 20162 votes

You just pulled this directly from your asshole. You have NO IDEA, right? You just thought this and typed it.

If you have any reason to actually think this, please provide the links.

One more time, how do you know this? Seriously. Are you just assuming that's the way it is?

Rather ironic, given that your main argument against permabans is:

Toxic players will just make new accounts and continue to play. And continue to play. And continue to play. Banning doesn't stop that.

Which is something you don't have any information about either.

obsesseAug 9, 20161 votes

Okay, fair enough, except that my point is an actual possibility and their argument is that new accounts made after permabans will be permabanned more quickly.

Is the possibility of people making or having multiple accounts not real? I have not claimed any rate at which this occurs, just that it does happen and nothing seems to prevent it.

Now the response is that permabanned players don't even bother to make new accounts because it's a hassle, and that's what happens most of the time.

AllMostOliverAug 9, 20162 votes

Do you have statistics on this happening most of the time or should I just take your word?

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

Um, no. If they don't want to be permabanned, they shouldn't have been toxic in the first place. "BUT DO NOT SAY THAT ALL TOXIC PLAYERS ARE EQUAL OR THAT VERBALLY ABUSIVE PLAYERS CAN BE HANDLED THE EXACT SAME WAY AS INTENTIONAL FEEDERS." ??? They are though. And they can and should be treated the same way. With an immediate 14 day ban at first unless it's extremely severe, followed by a permaban.

"You just pulled this directly from your asshole. You have NO IDEA, right? You just thought this and typed it.

If you have any reason to actually think this, please provide the links." Uh, except official Rioters mentioned this before in a thread months ago somewhere I can't be assed to find it now.

"One more time, how do you know this? Seriously. Are you just assuming that's the way it is?" Can you like, not be an ass? Or is that too difficult for you? And for all the blathering and whining you're doing about me supposedly making things up, you haven't cited a single source of proof for your side either. And once again, official Rioters have talked about this.

"Has my point really been that unclear? MY POINT IS THAT WE ARE NOT DOING A GOOD ENOUGH JOB AND WE COULD DO BETTER." ??? No, you are entirely incorrect. The system is working quite fine. The only possible issue I see is some people not being banned faster.

obsesseAug 9, 20161 votes

Okay man, I'm not going to argue with some Bronze 4 kid who's played League for 6 months.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

First of all, I have no idea how Rank has anything to do with toxicity and bans as a result thereof. Second of all, you're only S3, you're not good either. But hey, sure, whatever floats your boat. Thanks for telling me you've ran out of anything even close to an attempt at an argument though.

obsesseAug 9, 20161 votes

Whoa whoa whoa.

The point of me bringing that up was to highlight the high likelihood of you being a new player and thus new to the community in general. I'm not at all calling you bad, although it's clear that Bronze 4 is not a great rank.

I can see why you'd be defensive as a lot of people do use rank as an insult. I was just using it in this scenario because you don't seem to grasp people having the SAME account for YEARS.

If you lost your 6-month-old Bronze 4 account, honestly, it's not THAT big of a deal. If I lose my (previously Gold) 4-year-old account it's a much different thing.

You are throwing around permabans like its not shit. It's a big fucking deal and it's an extremely poor business practice to ban people like you have suggested. The fact that you don't realize that says a lot about you, I think, and one of those things is that you are simply new.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

I know I'm bad at the game, I just fail to see what that has anything to do with this, since it has nothing to do with the punishment system.

??? Why does it matter how long someone's had an account? It's entirely irrelevant. If they break the rules repeatedly, they will get permanently banned and lose their account, like they agreed.

Eh. Not really. Permabans aren't a big deal. Why? Because one really shouldn't be having to get permabanned in the first place.

No, it's not really a poor business practice at all. If anything, it's a really good business practice. By eliminating those who would ruin the experience for multiple others, it keeps said others happier. At the cost of that one toxic player, but eh, that toxic player is irrelevant and doesn't deserve to exist in the community anyways.

I do understand your points, I just fail to see why they matter/I disagree with them being valid.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

Because they don't deserve to play in the first place if they're going to be toxic in chat.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20162 votes

I get your points. I'm saying they're irrelevant.

xXxAltaïrrxXxAug 10, 20161 votes

ofc

KüramaAug 9, 20164 votes

The point of chat restriction is to reduce toxic communication and encourage positive communication in-game. Other forms of toxic behavior such as intentionally feeding are punished by bans as chat restrictions wouldn't assist in reforming intentional feeders.

scazzmanAug 9, 20162 votes

you fail to realize many banned players WANT very deeply to reform. the issue however, is a lot of these people, grew up in an era when if someone was bullying you, you were TAUGHT BY YOUR PARENTS to stand up for yourself and told them to fuck off, if not beat the crap out of them. AKA "retaliation" which riot doesnt let people do, so people are forced to go against ideals that that they grew up with as kids, which is scientifically proven to be VERY difficult, so then it becomes "i can't stop" and then you have the younger generation, growing up in an era where if you can act offended enough, you can get the authorities to bully for you

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

Yes they very much want to reform which is why they went through multiple strikes and warnings and then got themselves permabanned.

scazzmanAug 9, 20162 votes

however, its not as simple as waving a magic wand

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

Okay? Why is that relevant at all?

TrulyBlandAug 9, 20165 votes

One thing that is very important when discussing permabans: Permabans are already, as it is, the final straw. It's when Riot ran out of options that would feasibly help somebody reform. They're not meant to make people less toxic, they're meant to show people the door and hope they walk out of it.

And most people do. LoL isn't really all that much about unlocking, but restarting from scratch every time you are permabanned just doesn't sound appealing to most people. Sure, some people will continue coming back... but where's the difference between that and them continuing to be toxic on their main accounts?

Now, regarding permanent chat restrictions... those simply don't work out. Riot has essentially tried it, back when you really could only get chat restrictions from verbal toxicity (except for hatespeech). There were people that had more chat restrictions than they ever would have gotten rid of... and those people usually just kept stacking them up. And here's the thing: Most of those people ultimately got permanently banned for other things. Feeding/trolling, you name it. And even if Riot had a better system to detect feeders and trolls, the very very few people for which permanent chat restrictions might work out are simply not worth the majority of people that would resort to other ways of ruining games. Especially considering that the only upside of implementing permanent chat restrictions is catering to people who had enough chances to change their behaviour, but still just don't get how to play with strangers in a team.

tl;dr: PRO: Tiny minority gets some extra protection from things they bring onto themselves CON: Vast majority gets less protection from things others bring onto them.

That's just not a good deal.

obsesseAug 9, 20161 votes

Permabans are already, as it is, the final straw. It's when Riot ran out of options that would feasibly help somebody reform. They're not meant to make people less toxic, they're meant to show people the door and hope they walk out of it.

Great point. Unfortunately, it isn't working. The intention may be to show people the door, but they simply are not walking through it. To defend the current system is essentially saying it's perfect and no change is warranted. Do you think that's the case? I don't.

I think the system could be vastly improved upon, and the changes I would suggest are extremely easy.

And here's the thing: Most of those people ultimately got permanently banned for other things. Feeding/trolling, you name it.

That's to be expected. But it also does mean that some of the players would benefit from it, and neither of us have any idea what size that group would be. You could argue it's the majority, but you have no idea. You have zero statistics to back any of those claims up, and that's a huge part of the problem.

TrulyBlandAug 9, 20164 votes

To defend the current system is essentially saying it's perfect and no change is warranted.

That's bullshit and you know it. I'm also not even really defending the current system. I'm defending permabans as a concept because they're necessary as a final option, and I'm pointing out the flaw in your attempt to improve the system.

As to the amount of players that would profit from it: I'm reying on things Riot said. And there's probably a reason why they changed the system from issuing what were essentially permanent chat restrictions to a 4-strike system. The reasons they stated are exactly the reasons I'm telling you.

Edit: To be clear here... obviously the idea you have of improving the system isn't even a bad one. It's good enough for Riot to have had the same one and try it out. What I'm saying is, as promising as the idea may sound, it was already tried, and it ultimately did not work out.

Ellis McPickleAug 9, 20163 votes

Someone is mad they got perma banned, bud.

obsesseAug 9, 20161 votes

Someone else is mad that their child still leeches off them

ps never been banned, but thanks for posting the equivalent of "I'm 15 and jerk off in a sock" :)

Ellis McPickleAug 9, 20163 votes

Idk what you're talking about, I don't have any kids. How is that the posting equivalent? Do you wake up in the morning angry? Why are you such a troll?

obsesseAug 9, 20161 votes

The person in my reference would be a parent of yours.

Why are you acting like it isn't an insult to say that someone is mad about being permabanned?

You insulted me, I insulted you, you call me the troll. In every single one of my replies I've taken the time to be thoughtful and voice my opinion as clear as I know how; I'm not going to apologize to username "YourSisSwallows" for responding when their original comment adds nothing to the conversation.

Ellis McPickleAug 10, 20162 votes

So again, how does banning IN ANY WAY accomplish your dumbass point #1? You just pulled this directly from your asshole. You have NO IDEA, right? You just thought this and typed it. quotes by you so thoughtful

obsesseAug 10, 20161 votes

You are taking things I said out of context.

Riot may not care about context but it's clearly valuable in every human interaction.

You're right though, what you've quoted is definitely PG-13 and I wouldn't want anyone reading it under that age without parental guidance.

Thank you for keeping me in check, YourSisSwallows.

Ellis McPickleAug 10, 20162 votes

** I've taken the time to be thoughtful and voice my opinion as clear as I know how** Quote by you. My point is no you haven't, all you do is act like an ass when people don't agree with your opinions.

Mistress ShyvanaAug 9, 20162 votes

1.Rude 2. Then they will get banned for feeding, if an accounts chat banned it should be flagged for reports.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20162 votes

Why?
Refer to my original reason 1.

Mistress ShyvanaAug 9, 20161 votes

Just pointing out that was rude.

And like I said in another post in the thread, some people are to dumb/lack of control to watch their mouth, but if we take the ability to talk from them then A)they go on with their now muted account, pinging and otherwise playing the game. Or B) they start/keep trolling and get perma banned for that.

The goal is to get less permabans, but the people who need to be banned will still get banned.

Also riot needs a guide on reporting toxic behavior in lvs 1-30 because the system is much harsher on low levels but nobody reports so the trolls make it through. If more people muted/reported trolls while leveling there would be less.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20162 votes

But that implies they should be allowed to play in the first place if they would deserve a punishment for that.

Mistress ShyvanaAug 9, 20162 votes

But slapping people with the ban hammer for simple things like being dumb in chat(even if they get multiple warnings) is counterproductive as they just make new accounts and be even more toxic to our vulnerable new player community.

If riot just took the ability to talk away from ignorant people than they would think twice (do I abandon the account I can still play with my skins/champs/time on but not talk, or do I keep playing without talking except via out of game stuff)

Now people will still get permabanned but that would be the more severe cases who would just keep getting quickly banned on smurfs.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20162 votes

Then in the case they get a permachat ban like you described, it'd only be okay if:

They got all skins, champions, RP, and IP removed and reset.
They got all honors and any seasonal ranking rewards removed and reset.
They got their rank reset (to Unranked).
The chatban was permanent.
They're put on a high-warning flag for reports so that even a valid single report for in-game toxicity (which thanks to the permanent chatban, would mean they could only have been toxic game-play wise) will permanently ban their account the normal way instead.

Mistress ShyvanaAug 9, 20161 votes

i make really long posts, sorry

I 100% agree with 4 and 5 but I think 3 would be great for intentional feeding/trolling second offense.

But I am only proposing the chat ban for people with chat offenses everything else should go through the normal punishment chain. 1 and 2 could be feasible but a bit harsh for solely chat caused punishment. If they lose their stuff and have a chat ban then what's the point of staying they will either quit or make a new account and we don't want the later.

I'm simply all for having a better punishment for chat based offenses than perma banning them from the game. Any other offenses and they deserve what they get. The only time it should go with the other punishment path is if they are causing non chat related problems

AstôlfoAug 9, 20163 votes

Because they don't deserve to keep anything if they are willing to break the rules that many times to get to a punishment that severe in the first place. The Rank reset is so that they can't reap any seasonal rewards in a season they behave that way as well as losing the border.

The issue with giving any sort of lighter punishment to chat based offenses is they don't deserve it. And either way, permanently banned players will make a new account probably the first time around and be toxic, but then they will get permabanned again. And that's usually discouraging enough to prevent them from trying a second time. So they permanently quit. Which is better for the community.

Mistress ShyvanaAug 9, 20161 votes

Okay those points are understandable, agree with that but I wish there were better punishment/reform. But hey

Im sorry for the lazy post

venomous frostAug 9, 20162 votes

just my opinion here

A perma chat ban reduces the ability to work with your team greatly

It's just about weighing the pros and cons

Does riot want toxic people to not talk, or does riot just not want toxic people in their game.

Let's face it, toxic people are usually more likely to troll and intent feed, so my guess is riot rather wants toxic people removed from the game.

hope this makes sense

Mistress ShyvanaAug 9, 20162 votes

I could see the first one making sense a while ago. But now you can ping almost everything. Chat is almost not needed.

I think it would be better for when chat violations are done to perma/really long chat bans. If they decide to troll they will get reported and their account is already flagged. The people who actually care about the game but who have foul mouths will keep playing. The trolls will troll and get perma banned. And that way less account are being permanannes and less salty/toxic smurfs being made to compensate.

Tldr, with the new pings perma chat bans are feasible, keeps the ones who care, the bad ones get banned for trolling

venomous frostAug 9, 20161 votes

if you do care about the account why don't you just /mute all at the start of every game?

oh and btw I think there is an option to turn off the chat, and if there isn't you can always make the chat window really small so you dont see it anymore

Mistress ShyvanaAug 9, 20161 votes

The fact is not everyone has the self control to. Or take it in this was, the games going fine then as it's going and the once happy player is now tilted and making a mess of chat. The other players are egging them on and t only gets worse. They keep going responding to the taunts and passive aggressive comments, never stopping to think to mute all. They get reported, banned and now you get one of the "why did I get perma banned" post on the boards and possibly a new smurf on the rift.

When istead someone clearly doesn't know how not to talk, the system does it for them, perma chat ban.

Chat offenses like hate speech/death threats/"kill yourself" Or the like should always get your account banned, but you should lose the privilege to talk, pinging only for everything else.

AllMostOliverAug 9, 20161 votes

"Chat offenses unless hate speech/death threats/"kill yourself" Or the like shouldn't get your account banned, you should lose the privilege to talk, pinging only."

Exactly what I meant.

AstôlfoAug 9, 20162 votes

Uh, you must be delusional. People who say anything of that sort do not deserve to play. Ever.

Mistress ShyvanaAug 9, 20161 votes

Nah I'm just bad at wording things and probably ruined a great point because of it.

I just mean. The servere people just being down right toxic should get perma banned but for some stuff like repeat offender for minor bits of toxicity should just be perma chat banned.