Boards›Player Behavior

JUSTICE

The Ecdysiast··4 votes·591 views

Disclaimer: No, I have not been banned. I simply feel compelled to point out injustice when I see it. Edit: I am not asking that the permanent ban for inting/cheating/leaving be removed. I only ask that people be punished for them after actually doing them, not under the slippery assumption that because they were rude in chat they might do those things later. Edit 2: When I say "chat ban", I do not mean a "chat restriction." The difference is, a chat restriction still allows the punished player to say 3 messages during the game. What I'm asking for with a chat ban is that they not be allowed even that. No messages at all, every game.

Since people are so eager to compare the anonymous, inflectionless chat of this game to real-life encounters where your livelihood or well-being are at risk, consider this. Graffiti does not put a person away for life. Even multiple accounts of graffiti do not add up to a death sentence. This is an example of justice, where a crime is met with a reasonable punishment.

Why, then, can chat in this game be equated to such things as intentionally ruining the game for others by running down mid, using scripts to cheat the game, or leaving constantly? Those things which actually ruin the experience of playing the game in a way that the victims have no power over. I cannot have a friend replace a leaver. I cannot play around someone using scripts, and the more clever ones make it hard to even prove a script is being used. And I'd have to be several skill levels above everyone on the enemy team to overcome an ally running it down mid. Those are worthy of a permanent ban from playing the game.

But improper use of the chat function does not warrant a ban from playing the game. The first punishment for that offense is a step in the right direction; you get a chat restriction for abusing the chat. But that may ramp up to a permanent ban from play despite the offense having nothing to do with gameplay.

The ultimate punishment for chat-related offenses should rightfully be a permanent ban from chat.

Come on, Riot. Where's your sense of JUSTICE?Garen

I know that the strongest argument for the current system is this belief that all players who are rude in chat will become in-game trolls if they're chat-banned, but we have no evidence to support that notion. Even if it does so happen that they become feeders/leavers/scriptors because of the chat-ban, they can still be permabanned for that after the fact. But unless they actually do commit that worse offense, there is no reason to ban them on unfounded belief that they will commit it because of the prior, lesser offense.

40 Comments

ModThe Djinn6 votes

A question for you.

Your opinions of justice aside, what is the argument that leaving toxic players in the community leads to a better, friendlier, more communicative community? Those are Riot's goals from what I've seen and, while you don't make BAD points necessarily, you don't address this highly important topic which would NEED to be addressed before any change is implemented. A system that isnt better for Riot's goals isnt going to catch on.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Riot's goal is money. You can cover it up with the facade that they want a better, friendlier community, but this game has by and large the worst community of any competitive game.

And to that effect, they currently ban players who "misuse" the chat system from playing the game. In their eyes sacrificing the potential profit generated by them in exchange for the potential profit of those other players they might drive away. But there is no proof whatsoever that toxicity actually drives away players from this game in particular. It may drive players away from other games which are more static in nature and thus lack the enormous learning curve this one has that makes arcade-style fighters look like candy crush in comparison.

It's more likely players leave because things they liked have been changed. Champions get changed completely, the meta shifts so often that if you love a certain class, you're on razor's edge when it comes to being able to have fun. But instead of addressing the things that actually drive players to leave the game, they attribute far too much of it to the community, blaming us players when it is not our fault.

Back to my original point, Riot is a company whose purpose is to make money. Making a game that is fun and a community that is tolerable are simply means to that end. And they stand to gain more from allowing subjectively toxic players to continue to spend money on the same account if they decide to play without increasing the magnitude of their offenses than they do banning those players outright.

But to address what you believe their goal to be, what I'm suggesting does lead to a friendlier community of the same size, rather than chipping away at the community for the illusion of improvement. It does not leave toxic players in the community because it removes their ability to be toxic. As I stated in the OP, if they then decide that they want to take the large leap from using the chat function to running it down mid in ranked, then they deserve to be banned.

I'd like to know your opinion of justice, if you believe that all crimes should be met with the ultimate punishment.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}Back to my original point, Riot is a company whose purpose is to make money. Making a game that is fun and a community that is tolerable are simply means to that end.

Riot has proven in the past that they are willing to sacrifice some potential income for the sake of the playerbase. As someone who has talked personally with many Rioters, I can assure you that the playerbase is something they think about and care about. You may not agree with me, but that's been my experience with every one I've encountered, including the department leads.

I'd like to know your opinion of justice, if you believe that all crimes should be met with the ultimate punishment.

I don't. I also don't believe that banning someone from a game is the worst punishment -- merely the worst one Riot can apply. They also don't have to scale down everything appropriately -- they've chosen to go in the opposite direction, and say "toxic behavior is unacceptable, and will eventually get you banned."

With that established, anything above and beyond that, although worse, meets with the same punishment because there is no worse punishment Riot has. All toxic behavior is deemed unacceptable, which means that super toxic behavior is...still unacceptable.

Think of it like a country that has a maximum of a 15 year prison sentence, which you can get for, say, armed robbery. That's a MAXIMUM though: extra crimes don't get you more. Seven armed robberies? Maximum 15 years. Murder? Maximum 15 years. Once you've hit the maximum punishment you simply can't go higher, even if, in theory, what you've done is worse.

I think, ultimately, the reason Riot has not opted for a permanent mute as a punishment is simple: they tried it. For a long time. Chat restrictions used to build up and up, and it didn't do much to reduce toxicity overall. It's an experiment that definitely had value, because it DOES seem like an easy solution, but, in practice, it didn't work well.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

They did not try it for a long time. They tried it for about a quarter of the game's existence, and no more. And if Riot's "tests" of gameplay balance are any indication of the "tests" they perform for punishment issues, then they are completely unreliable at best.

But regarding the 15 year prison sentence, you seem to be completely misunderstanding my request. I am not asking that a player be immune to permanent bans due to in-game behavior if they've been hit with a permanent chat restriction. By all means, ban those players who choose to escalate their infractions. But only AFTER they have **ACTUALLY DONE SO. **

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}

They did not try it for a long time. They tried it for about a quarter of the game's existence, and no more. And if Riot's "tests" of gameplay balance are any indication of the "tests" they perform for punishment issues, then they are completely unreliable at best.

But regarding the 15 year prison sentence, you seem to be completely misunderstanding my request. I am not asking that a player be immune to permanent bans due to in-game behavior if they've been hit with a permanent chat restriction. By all means, ban those players who choose to escalate their infractions. But only AFTER they have **ACTUALLY DONE SO. **

It is clear that we are not likely to agree. As such, and given the tone of some of your recent posts, I'm not sure there is a benefit to either of us to continue this discussion. I feel it will only end up with us talking in circles.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Agree on what? You've shown a fundamental misunderstanding of the point I was making, and I'm only trying to explain what I meant to you.

Though I think the original post does that job well enough.

You're just refusing to see reason, under the guise that it's okay to punish people for the crimes that others before them committed.

Sarutobi2 votes

{quoted}

Agree on what? You've shown a fundamental misunderstanding of the point I was making, and I'm only trying to explain what I meant to you.

Though I think the original post does that job well enough.

You're just refusing to see reason, under the guise that it's okay to punish people for the crimes that others before them committed.

The fact of the matter is that they did try it. You don't want to see it their way as well so it makes no sense arguing with you when your opinion on the matter is already set. They did it and people trolled when they weren't allowed to use chat. So what makes you think now that's all going to go away? Especially when trolling and toxicity is still running rampant?

HalcyonDweller2 votes

{quoted}

if you believe that all crimes should be met with the ultimate punishment.

Dude, you just made up an opinion for them and shoved it into a word bubble above their head.

Address what they have to say, nothing more and nothing less. Don't make shit up to try to discredit them for challenging your idea. That's just poor arguing.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

I did not. He stated himself that he believes a permanent ban is in order for misuse of the chat. Ergo, he believes all possible actions against the rules of the game should be met with the ultimate punishment available to Riot.

That is what he had to say, and I simply asked him to explain his concept of justice if that is what he believes.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

No, you jumped to conclusions.

You heard their reasons, and based on the premise you decided that those reasons must lead to the conclusion that the ultimate punishment is appropriate.

You ignored the unknown factors. For example, they might well think that this is only fair after consistent negative behavior despite getting enough warnings and chances to improve. Actually that isn't just a possibility, they fucking spelled it out in their other comments.

Additionally you phrased it in the worst way possible to make their opinion sound much worse than it actually is.

Chermorg4 votes

The reason that repeated cases of toxicity over time are equated to those other behaviors is that it still ruins games for other players.

Why should Riot continuously chat restrict someone, which eliminates free team communicating, if they're continuously ruining games? Further, what do you do with someone who's still toxic on chat restriction?

The Ecdysiast1 votes

It does not ruin the game. As I pointed out, there are actions you can take in game to prevent yourself from seeing chat that rustles your jimmies while still continuing to play the game. I've taken the liberty to turn off /all chat, and mute allies at the slightest hint of things that might effect my focus. Those other offenses, however, cannot be remedied by your own actions. Therein lies the difference.

You're misunderstanding. I am not asking for a permanent chat restriction, where the player is allowed a few messages a game. I am asking for a permanent chat ban, where the player is allowed zero messages in any and all games.

If they decide to take the leap from being rude in chat to intentionally feeding, cheating, or leaving, then they can be punished accordingly.

Chermorg3 votes

Riot will not remove all communication from a team game simply because you lack self control.

The Ecdysiast2 votes

I'm not asking that they do that. I'm asking they remove the chat function from one player. They can still read the chat of their teammates and use pings. That is not "removing all communication from a team game."

And pings are only getting more and more advanced. Where you used to have to type in the chat the spawn timer for dragon and baron, you can now not only see them both at all times, but ping them for your allies. Same goes for enemy summoner spells.

The only function not available with pings that may need to be said in chat is whether or not an enemy has their ultimate ability.

Chermorg2 votes

Riot has stated that they consider team discussion using chat to be an integral part of the game, and that's the reason for not placing longer or infinite chat restrictions.

Again, it is not Riot's job to make up for one's lack of self control.

edited to make clear that the last statement was not directed at OP or anyone in particular

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Riot has stated a lot of lies.

You can stop the personal attack, as you can see in the OP that I haven't been punished for anything of the sort.

Seeing as we're one single ping short from it being completely unnecessary, your argument that it's needed for communication is completely moot.

Riot is responsible for being fair to the entire community, not pandering to those with glass bones and paper skin. I'll admit, I abuse this very report because I'm a jerk, not because I'm actually offended. If someone says even the slightest slur or "kys" in chat, I'll screenshot and send in a report ticket because I'm petty and I know the system is so broken that it'll work.

Chermorg1 votes

I apologize as that last statement was meant to be a generalization and certainly not directed at you at all.

I have some things that need said that can't be (and never will be) said with pings:

  • "i think we should try for an early baron in 5 mins or so"
  • "support pls dont hit cs under turret so i can get them ty"
  • "(from jg) hey botlane i'm going to work my way behind them in 3 minutes so please push them into turret and poke if u can"
  • "what lane should we focus on guys"
  • "ok yi can u split push while we get dragon"

None of those things (and infinite more I didn't write) can be said with pings, and there's no way you can make those into pings.

Riot is not pandering to people with "glass bones and paper skin", they're pandering to the 90+% of the playerbase who doesn't like seeing toxic players in their games. The current system is based on what was punished in Tribunal - which was player run, as well as feedback based on report frequency for certain behaviors since Tribunal and suggestions from the community. That's not a broken system, that's a damn good one - where the majority of the community decides what's acceptable and what isn't.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

Hold on now, they might have a legitimate point here!

A lot of communication can be done through pings. Arguably most of what is necessary can be communicated this way.

I'm not saying we should stop banning players, but I think it warrants consideration that we could force players who prove incapable of controlling their words to stop using chat.

Or better yet, we could 'mute' them for their teammates without them or their teammates knowing. Stealth muting toxicity is the best way to keep the toxic player from finding ways around the barriers. They never receive responses for their toxic comments, and then they give up on being toxic.

Chermorg2 votes

There is one aspect that cannot be communicated through pings, and it's arguably the most important one:

-Communicating with your team about future strategy for the next minute, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, and the rest of the game.

If you cannot effectively tell your team what you're about to do, what you plan to do, and what you hope to do, you will put not only yourself, but your team at a disadvantage. People being on chat restriction already put their team at a big disadvantage - and OP wants Riot to remove chat from him altogether so he's unable to communicate even 1 message per 4 minutes.

As I said before, Riot is not behind and likely won't get behind the idea of removing the most important form of communication from a team game. No one person is important enough to put 4 other teammates at a disadvantage in every single game they play.

HalcyonDweller1 votes

{quoted}

There is one aspect that cannot be communicated through pings, and it's arguably the most important one:

-Communicating with your team about future strategy for the next minute, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, and the rest of the game.

  • snip -

Ah I hadn't thought about it that way before.

As I said before, Riot is not behind and likely won't get behind the idea of removing the most important form of communication from a team game. No one person is important enough to put 4 other teammates at a disadvantage in every single game they play.

Now it makes more sense to me, I do see what you meant now.

Thanks for taking the time to type that out and discuss it with me!

[slayer-pantheon-thumbs]

sanshaoye2 votes

up voted. excellent argument and analysis

MadMad Sickness1 votes

{quoted}

up voted. excellent argument and analysis

If they could figure out how to do a "chat only" ban it may not be a bad thing. Only thing is that people would still use their main account, while using other accounts to be toxic on those accounts instead of the main one.

It would severely lessen the effects of the punishment and people may not be as motivated into reforming. Because nothing can push you more into reforming then: "we are gonna take everything you have bought, and all of our services away from you".

If that isn't enough, then I don't know what else can motivate a person into reforming.

sanshaoye1 votes

not if you didn't invest anything into the account(s) or you have resources to get a whole bunch of them and don't mind the marginal cost. in fact, what you point out in your reply is exactly what many players do - they create smurfs and troll games

MadMad Sickness2 votes

{quoted}

not if you didn't invest anything into the account(s) or you have resources to get a whole bunch of them and don't mind the marginal cost. in fact, what you point out in your reply is exactly what many players do - they create smurfs and troll games

I would say that time/effort is a personal investment. If you get your account repeatedly banned then you lose out on all of that time you have spent.

I mean, it is unfortunate that there are some players for whom the case you pointed out is/would be true. Riot(NA) does give people the opportunity to keep playing on new accounts so that have the opportunity to reform their behavior... Unlike in other countries I believe. From last time I checked people in south korea are only allowed one account per person, and they can be subject to perma ip bans. Not sure if this is still true, or how this is enforced.

I can infer that the hope for reformation is the reason that the permanent ban penalty is given for chat offenses. Riot wants to motivate people to change their behaviors.

Anyway, some permanent bans are completely justified in my opinion. If such people got off with a lesser punishment then what they truly deserved, then I would also think that was unfortunate.

Anyway, the scenario does change... and sometimes the offense is severe. And sometimes some people are just downright, completely toxic individuals.

sanshaoye1 votes

that would depend on how the time is being spent. if the player just spends time trolling games and other players, then it's nothing more than time investment vs the marginal utility the player obtains from trolling

the fact that so many players are trolling possibly indicates that the marginal utility outweighs the time investment

The Ecdysiast1 votes

There is a chat only ban. Currently, chat restrictions have no effect on the friends list. I don't know how you've gotten that confused.

And if it makes people make more accounts to be toxic on, that's only gonna make Riot MORE money.

But your idea that it takes a death sentence to reform a person is completely illogical. The punishment must match the crime. It does not matter if taking chat away doesn't reform the person. They will be literally incapable of abusing the chat again on that account.

The gameplay ban should be the ultimate punishment, AFTER you've switched from simply being a troll in chat to being a troll in-game.

Sarutobi2 votes

"The ultimate punishment for chat-related offenses should rightfully be a permanent ban from chat."

But there lies the problem. Since Riot already did this and proved that it didnt work, and only made people worse to the point of causing other problems in game like trolling, intentionally feeding/losing the game. Why bring it back? While it would be nice to have a perma-chat restriction, especially towards people who just banter. The community has already proven that it does help them reform, so why put it back in? I dont believe people should get a chat restriction for using things like Slurs. That should be an outright ban as it is now since there is absolutely no reason to use it!

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Please link to your proof that they did this recently. If it was something they "tested" back in season 1 or the alpha, then it holds no bearing on the state of the community at present.

And no, slurs should not be an outright ban. They're just like any other words. They cannot hurt you. These people do not know you, cannot see you, and don't even know your real name. If you allow them to hurt you, your skin is far too thin to be online without a parent's permission.

Sarutobi1 votes

{quoted}

Please link to your proof that they did this recently. If it was something they "tested" back in season 1 or the alpha, then it holds no bearing on the state of the community at present.

And no, slurs should not be an outright ban. They're just like any other words. They cannot hurt you. These people do not know you, cannot see you, and don't even know your real name. If you allow them to hurt you, your skin is far too thin to be online without a parent's permission.

They did this i want to say back in Season 3, maybe 4. It was fairly recent (at least in my opinion)

I understand your opinion on slurs, but i believe just like every other place on this planet it should be treated as such. Trying using those slurs to talk to random people on the street, or at your job/customers? You would get the same reaction there as you would here. Yes they are just words, but at the same time hold a very powerful meaning that we as a society just havent moved passed yet.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

It was season 2 at the latest, as that is when I started playing. That means it was not recent, but even if it were as late as 3 or 4, that is still not recent. The number of players has increased dramatically over just a few years. (and I don't see a link)

It's kind of tiring to see people compare this anonymous chat with real-life encounters. They are in no way comparable. If you call a black person the N word on the street, you should expect to get punched or beaten up. If you call a Lucian the N word in this game, there should be no repercussions. You don't know if the player is black. You don't even know the other player's name.

In person words have weight and inflection. You could use almost any slur in an endearing way to a friend. You could also yell it at someone in anger or with hate. But through text, it is impossible to tell the emotions and meaning attached.

One funny example I found in a Riot post regarding the report system is the difference between yo mama jokes in english and in korean. In english you're probably just being funny, and other players will understand that. But in korean it is, in Lyte's words, "always deeply offensive." So on the Korean server, you could get banned for a yo mama joke. Which is completely ridiculous.

MadMad Sickness1 votes

Not sure why it is the way it is. I'm not against this idea, just don't know how it would be implemented. How would you even coordinate with the friend's system? It would be completely weird.

Anyway, it doesn't matter because Riot has already reserved the right to remove people from the game that they honestly don't want playing it. I guess if they believe that you are a bad person who completely deserves to not play their game (even if that is true or not, regardless of the circumstances and whether or not they are right/wrong in what they say): then they will remove you completely from the game.

It's their decision to do it this way, even if they are right or wrong to do it this way. It is stated in the terms of use that this is the case. And you can't play the game unless you agree that Riot has the right to take way their services whenever you violate their terms, regardless of what you personally believe. Because what really matters is what Riot believes is the right or wrong way to use their services, not what you believe to be right or wrong.

Alot of legal mumbo jumbo.

As for cheaters/botters/etc. Report them. Riot will ban them too if they violate the terms of use. Just gotta have faith in the system and be a proactive player.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

What do you mean with the friends system? You aren't restricted from chatting with your friends list when you're restricted from chat in game. They're two separate functions. Likewise, you would be permanently banned from the in-game chat, with no effect whatsoever on the friends chat.

And I know it's how they do it. But it's the community's duty to point out when something is fundamentally broken so that Riot will fix it.

Stars Shaper1 votes

I think that the rising punishment comes from the fact that Riot tried to use "Perma Silence" (which would be the most fair punishment for continous chat abuses) but realized it just put the affected player and their team in a position unable to collaborate.

Baka Red2 votes

I believe that "Permanent Silence" was changed into Suspensions because people who had Permanent Silence upgraded their toxic chat into toxic gameplay: Intentional feeding, Afking, harassing team mates with their powers (imagine malicious use of any champion who can affect your own gameplay; for example Support Tahm eating the ADC, spitting him in middle of the enemy and walking away. Other champions like Taliyah, Anivia, Trundle and most likely some others can be used for that too. Or just walking to a nearby bush to appear like he is ganking, and getting you killed by walking away when the fight begins.)

I believe we have no need for Permanent Silence. I am fine with the current system: If I get punished for toxicity four times, I get a free permanent Suspension because I deserve that. That won't ever happen though as long as Riot's IFS doesn't make a huge mistake. How do I know that? Because non toxic people don't get punished except by IFS mistake.

Stars Shaper1 votes

Indeed you are right.

I am fine with the current system too, I said that "perma silence" was the most sensed punishment because it only affected your ability to verbally abuse others, but ofc once the behavior becomes toxic on a gameplay level things change.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

And I am not suggesting that those people still be allowed to continue after becoming toxic with their gameplay. But people who are only rude in chat and haven't started inting/cheating/leaving should not be punished for doing so until after they've actually done it.

You can't punish a person for armed robbery just because they've been in a bar fight.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

And I do not agree with the assumption that all those who are rude in chat will upgrade their toxicity to toxic gameplay. People should not be punished for a crime they did not commit on the basis that there exist a small number of cases where people who committed the same petty crimes went on to commit more heinous ones.

All this is is a form of profiling.

Warwick Main1 votes

I actually like the idea of a scaling time ban. First 2 offenses are chat restrictions (5 game, then 25 game), eventually leading to a 3 day ban, 7 day ban, and 14 day ban max. I don't like being flamed but I don't think the people I report should be perma'd. Those permabanned players usually make a new account and having leveled many accounts this year I can tell you its horrible dealing with them.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

Yeah. I don't agree that permanently banning such players leads to anything good. If they still want to play the game, they simply make a new account and are more toxic than before, but more careful about it to avoid the ban. All it does is make them harbor resentment for the community and the game.

nhentai1770131 votes

This is very true

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

More by The Ecdysiast

Please Add Black Market Brawlers to the Rotation
Gameplay97 comments
273
votes
No chest for S- if a lobby member is punished
Report a Bug89 comments
212
votes
590 RP is not 6300 IP (Rune Page Cost inequality)
Gameplay100 comments
207
votes
Solari "rejected all other forms of light as false"
Story, Art, & Sound96 comments
160
votes
PSA that Soraka does %HP True damage
Gameplay96 comments
150
votes
They should keep this Yasuo "bug"
Gameplay201 comments
136
votes