Suspending and Permanently Banning Accounts

Tydues ·Jul 12, 2018·2 votes·1,215 views

Suspending and Permanently Banning accounts needs to be changed. I do not see a need for it other than people intentionally feeding. As all you know this game is very toxic which drives away newer players. LOL thought lets ban accounts hence it will end the toxicity. Has it though??? No it has not. Players just create a new accounts and flame new players as they level up. I love this game and do not want to see it go away as others have in the past due to stupid rules like banning a players account especially if they spent money on it. Therefore I propose that LOL reinstate those accounts that were banned for toxicity and instead permanently silence them. This will help solve the issue of players flaming others especially the new players we need to keep the game going. By permanently silencing them rather than banning them still allows the toxic player to play on his account and allows for the community to stay positive. If the toxic player quits playing because they are silenced that is on them but it should not be on LOL to say sorry you spent 50 dollars on this account now you can not play because you are toxic. To ban an account for toxicity makes no sense. Specially if LOL could just permanently silence them. Therefore LOL stop banning accounts for toxicity, instead silence their noob asses but let them play . Lets grow the game and bring LOL back to all its glory.

9 Comments

Umbral RegentJul 12, 20188 votes

Permanent mutes (or, rather, indefinitely scaling chat restrictions) don't work. Riot has already tried them, and the majority of players under longer-scale chat restrictions simply resorted to trolling and feeding. Why give them the opportunity, especially when they're clearly not willing to shape up their behavior in chat?

If they're not gonna reform, and if removing their chat is only going to narrow down the avenues they can use to be toxic to trolling and feeding, why leave the middleman in there? The permanent ban is the best solution for players who just don't want to learn or reform.

Tydues Jul 12, 20181 votes

If they troll or feed they get banned. But players should not get banned for toxicity period. If the want to be little babies let them. But I know of plenty of players that would still play seriously if their accounts had been permanently silenced over banning their accounts. Banning does not work if a player is toxic. As stated before they just create a new account and flame new players. So you argument is invalid. If a player wants to flame he still can. If he intentional feeds then perm ban him. You are talking about 2 different things. I'm not saying don't ban players that feed and if its intentional then they will be banned quickly but at least give toxic players the chance to stay on perm silenced accounts.

Umbral RegentJul 12, 20186 votes

Banning does not work if a player is toxic. As stated before they just create a new account and flame new players. So you argument is invalid.

Only a handful of players actually decide to make new accounts and continue being toxic. And even still - no number of them coming back can invalidate the argument - 'cause people coming back and resuming their toxicity, no matter the number is irrelevant to the case of players trolling and feeding when they get permanently chat restricted.

I'm not saying don't ban players that feed and if its intentional then they will be banned quickly but at least give toxic players the chance to stay on perm silenced accounts.

And I'm saying when Riot tested indefinitely scaling chat restrictions, they found that players under longer scale restrictions resorted to trolling and intentionally feeding to express their toxicity.

Why allow them the opportunity to do that? If they've proven on three or four separate occasions that they're not gonna obey the rules, why expect that a band-aid solution is going to magically make them adhere to the rules any better than they were before?

It's not hard to not be toxic, so rather than expecting Riot to accommodate players who continually prove to be toxic despite several warnings that it's against the rules...Why not we just have people not be toxic in the first place?

Tydues Jul 12, 20181 votes

doesn't matter I see so many toxic people and I see feeders that can all talk. so throw more useless stats at me plz. What I do see if people getting their accounts taken they spent money on for simple talking All I am sayin is basically they are stealing accounts that people spent money on or time for simply being toxic. The correct response would be to perm silence them and if they feed then ban them.

Umbral RegentJul 12, 20185 votes

What I do see if people getting their accounts taken they spent money on for simple talking.

And what you see as simple talking, is in fact people berating, harassing, and belittling their teammates, or otherwise corroding and ruining morale, and making the game an overall pleasant place.

Money spent does not and should not matter. Spending money should not ever serve as a safeguard against just punishment.

All I am sayin is basically they are stealing accounts that people spent money on or time for simply being toxic.

...How can you steal something that's already yours? Think of it like this: Riot owns every account made on their service, and they allow players what is essentially free rental, provided those players follow the rules laid out for them. We can spend money on virtual effects that do nothing but look good, but those effects are tied to the account, which, again, Riot owns and is allowing us to rent for free.

The rules can basically be summarized as "don't be toxic" or "don't be a dick". They are very simple and very easy rules to follow. And again: Riot expects us to follow these rules in exchange for the ability to play their game for free.

If we can't follow those rules, we aren't honoring our agreement with Riot, and effectively, our rental is void. And that's where Riot is fully allowed to exercise their right to revoke access to our accounts.

The correct response would be to perm silence them and if they feed then ban them.

I've already asked it twice now, both times you've ignored it, but why even give them the chance to feed?

However you choose to respond, though, I'm bowing out. I've said all that really needs to be said on the matter, and there's no real value to repeating the same thing over and over again.

ModPrandineJul 12, 20185 votes

[{quoted}](name=Tydues ,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=dzhI3lPI,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2018-07-12T22:04:08.116+0000)

doesn't matter I see so many toxic people and I see feeders that can all talk. so throw more useless stats at me plz. What I do see if people getting their accounts taken they spent money on for simple talking All I am sayin is basically they are stealing accounts that people spent money on or time for simply being toxic. The correct response would be to perm silence them and if they feed then ban them.

You may not agree with it but the facts are the facts. From Riot Tantram:

It really breaks down into two categories.

1.) Helping players reform 2.) Shielding others from the behavior, at a cost.

We used to issue chat restrictions that essentially scaled indefinitely.

We were able to determine that after a certain point the penalty no longer helped with reform. The 10-game and 25-game counts for chat restrictions are based on data that they were both light enough, and felt strict enough to encourage people to understand their behavior is unacceptable in game and change it.

We also saw that the players in this 'large restriction' category defaulted to gameplay altering means of harassing their team. It caused an increase in feeding and trolling.

The sample size of this population and time frame is huge. Essentially the time spanning from the introduction of chat restrictions to the introduction of IFS.

So my question for you is, would you rather have more feeders and less negative chat?

If someone isn't gonna behave properly despite being given multiple chances to do so then why shouldn't they be removed from the game permanently?

Also, Riot is not stealing peoples money when they punish them for misbehavior. For one, spending money is optional on this free to play game. If you do you do so of your own free will. For two, it's outlined in the Terms of Service that you don't own anything on your account and that Riot reserves the right to terminate access to it at any time and for any reason. Be thankful that Riot only does that when people violate the rules time and time again. Spending money doesn't make you immune to the rules like so many seem to think.

Finally people who get punished for gameplay related behavior (and zero-tolerance policy infractions) are given a 2-week ban for the first punishment or a permaban if they have a history of poor behavior. Yes most people find gameplay trolling and inting worse behavior than being verbally abusive in chat, but think of it this way: the more time one spends verbally abusing and harassing others in chat, the less time they're spending actually playing the game itself, and while muting them does help you focus on the game, that doesn't change the fact that they're not participating in it themselves, which is also a problem.