So, I rather like this discussion from the gate, as it opens up a little further a layer of the punishment system that has, in passing, been mentioned and known, which is partial subjectivity in an otherwise objective system.
In other words, the system itself works objectively, but the actual requirements for a punish are ostensibly subjective - someone has to find another player worth reporting, and consequently report them, in order to trigger a review and potential punishment.
But, I wouldn't want to ramble on on that too soon, so, I'mma get to those questions.
What is "Toxic" to you?
To me, obsessive negativity and excessive flame is toxic, and of course those two things characterize toxicity in that regard. It's sort of a tricky thing to discern between people (as you mentioned, many people have different upbringings and different values, so, what's toxic to one is mild to another), but I find it safest to avoid labelling folks as toxic unless they hit a fairly high bar of negativity/misbehavior.
Suffice it to say, even out of the majority of people I've seen post on the boards about their punishments, only an immodest handful can really be considered toxic in my eyes. Those few are often delusional, thinking they're in the right, or just incorrigible jerks who really don't care one way or the other, they just live to hate.
Is complaining necessarily toxic?(Give reasoning for or against)
It's tricky for me to answer this one, but, I'd personally say that complaining, for the most part, isn't toxic. It can get there, certainly - like a TF top lane complaining all game long about Ornn - but beyond that, I figure it's mostly okay to complain. Of course, the boundary between modest, moderate, and excessive complaining can be a very thin one, so, I'm not sure I could honestly speak on it much.
Is being blunt considered toxicity?
This is kind of a half-and-half, honestly. Being blunt in general is sure to irritate most people, but in and of itself, bluntness isn't toxic. Moreover, I find that the issue is, most people who speak bluntly don't quite know how to be tactful about what they say. It's the difference between "man, you suck as Jhin" and "looks like you have trouble with those long-range skillshots".
Of course, the former (and being blunt in general) is fairly easy to do in League, considering the fast pace of gameplay and intense focus requirements make communication sparse and necessitates being quick, but altogether I think many could benefit from a little better wording.
(...i think i kinda digressed there a bit. whoops.)
Because people grow up with differing values, does the subjectivity of what is "nice" and what is "toxic" have any relevancy?
This goes back to what I mentioned in the first two paragraphs, but the short answer is - yes, personal values and subjectivity does have some relevancy in the punishment system, although it is ultimately held up to an overarching standard set by Riot and the community at large.
Where the subjectivity applies is to the moment-to-moment games, and players' decisions to report others. That's where the subjectivity ends, and the objectivity begins, but, it still ultimately relies on that subjective "I don't like how this player acted" for the system to investigate and act.
This is where some confusion comes into play (particularly from players who get punished, especially in cases of hate speech), wherein Player A gets punished for hate speech (let's say using racial slurs as though they meant "friend" or whatever instead of being an insult), and gets confused about why the system punished him, when, say, Player B also used hate speech (before, during, after, whenever), and has yet to see punishment.
What Player A doesn't realize is that Player B very likely hasn't been reported for hate speech yet, potentially because they were in premades or something of the like, and that the only prerequisite for a player getting punished is for them to be reported - so, obviously, no one took issue with Player B using hate speech in whatever matches, but someone did with Player A.
And that is the case of subjectivity in an otherwise objective system - and, I know that the whole "hate speech case" thing is a bit of an edge one, but it does at least serve to show where that subjectivity in defining what's toxic and what's nice comes into play. One could think up numerous other cases for examples - someone's complaining, does anyone feel they warrant being punished for it? Do people find it unacceptable? Etc.
TL;DR, though - yes. Subjectivity on what's okay and what isn't, player-to-player, is very relevant to the system, in a fairly large sense.
Based on the above question, while "if you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all" is essentially the golden rule of conversation, does this not discriminate against those who don't have filters? (I for example have Aspergers syndrome, and as such it is difficult for me to read situations correctly)
I'm not sure exactly, but, I want to say "no". Albeit, I'm neurotypical as far as I know, so, take what I say with a grain of salt as I speak from no prior experience with disabilities, disorders, and so on, but, as far as I can tell, everyone who plays League of Legends is held to the same standards of conduct, regardless of anything.
And, some may say it's discriminatory, but, in all honesty, I think it's fair. After all, non-neurotypical people are still people. They're not defined by their maladies or disabilities. ('course, again, neurotypical, I don't have any personal issues or ailments that would cause me in some respect to infringe on the rules, so, again, grain of salt.)
In all honesty, though, I can't really say much on this matter, both from personal experience, and out of respect to those with lives and issues different to mine.
For an easy example, connotations and context vary between the usage of the "F" word, and its variability goes from DANG to insert negative connotation here. Is there a work around for this? And as a followup, does turning off the chat filter inherently mean "I consent to these words being around me?"
I'm going to assume by "the 'F' word", you mean "fuck". That's more or less an easy thing, as the rule generally just boils down to "you're allowed to curse as much as you want, as long as you don't level those swears against another player". I can say "Fuck, I missed my ult", "shit, that didn't work", and even "Fuck Akali.", and I'm not really going to face punishment. That last example is...Ehh, but, as long as you aren't spamming or being really inflammatory about it, you can say "fuck that Champion" about...Just about anyone.
But, when you start cursing to insult and chew out other players, it becomes a problem. "how can you be so shit at this game that you can't even win lane as Garen", "fucking feeders", "you're an asshole" - etc., those are examples of problematic and punishable uses of swears. Of course, that rule "say what you want as long as you don't insult/attack other players with your chat" kinda covers pretty much all the chat in general, but, some people have misconceptions about the rules regarding swearing.
As for the Mature Language Filter, it's not really a matter of consenting to the words being around players, but rather, turning off the Mature Language Filter is really just saying "I know the words, I don't care to see them. If they're an issue, they're an issue, but I'll go unfazed".
'Course, there are some people who prefer the Mature Language Filter being on for one reason or another, but, I don't know them, and I don't know their reasons, so, I can't speak on that.
Is the connotation of a word relevant, even when a positively connotative word is used as an insult?
I feel as though the IFS doesn't care about connotation, much like it doesn't care about context, so, if a word is used as an insult, it's still an insult. The IFS will likely read it as such. And, of course, one can go back to the "hate speech case" earlier, and have another example of connotation being tossed aside, but, again, that's a tad faulty to refer to as hate speech in general is considered zero tolerance chat, so it's punished regardless of connotation, context, or whatever else.
Though, I can imagine at least one example of a positively connotative word used somewhat as an insult? Like, being called "a dandy". I'm not sure how it'd register in the IFS, but, I mean. I wouldn't report it. (although that goes back to the topic of subjectivity in an objective punishment system, so, once again - I digress.)
Followup to the above: are insults in general subjective or are they completely objective in a "This is obviously an insult" way.
Like above, it sorta plays into the whole subjectivity of reporting other players, but, I think subjective insults would probably have less of an impact on one's standing in the punishment system than objective ones. Moreover - not all insults are treated the same, and some could ultimately wind up with players getting punished faster than others.
Is negativity in general toxic?
Nope. One can be a negative nancy, a pessimist, what have you - but, as long as you can moderate yourself and prevent it from becoming an issue, you won't likely be punished for it, and even then, you won't be considered toxic for it.
This response is getting too long, so I'll continue on in this comment string with another response. Part 1 ends here.
hasn't applied in 300 years) The only time that changes and you're allowed to defend yourself in when your life is in physical danger.
and throwing them into the fountain do anything? If you're not helping to win the game you're contributing to it's loss and that's probably toxic.