Riot should stop giving out perma bans, they should just make them 1 month bans.

I suggest you read my other reply to a different reply of yours.

I'll paraphrase:

Yes, there will be asshats (it is the nature of the internet).

Yes, many of the banned will not go away or change.

Yes, the new player experience sucks.

No, giving people their accounts back will not help. (Most) banned players will do exactly what they do now:

1. Be shitty until they get (temporarily/permanently) banned
2. Make a new account, terrorizing the low levels/ranks

What you propose adds a step 3: When the temporary ban is up, continue being shitty in high levels/ranks, until banned again.

How is that any better? With that, not only is the new player experience a complete shithole, but the veteran player experience is a complete shithole as well.

Even if you suggest for repeat offenders to get increasing ban lengths, or eventual permanent ban, guess what? You are right back to square one, where we are now. While the high level accounts are banned, they will terrorize the lower levels again.

Making low level players deal with the shit isn't a good solution, I agree with you there, but unleashing that hell on ALL levels is a sure way to kill the game. In that situation, new players aren't the only ones who will be leaving, veteran players will be leaving (and in droves) as well.

If you think that subjecting new players to that is making the game worse, what do you think of subjecting ALL players to that does?

{quoted}

Well I thank you for fully explaining your position, its difficult to have a conversation about this, and few people are willing to explain why they feel the way they do.

While a repeating 1 month ban isnt exactly what I think is best, my MAIN concern is with the ugly pit pera-bans create. I was mainly in this topic to argue what perma bans create.

Personally I believe the 2 week suspension should be held off (as this is the main point of secondary angry account creation occurrences), and the 10 or 20 game chat restriction (whatever it is) should be followed by permanent game chat silence (not 5 message limit, NO messages can be typed or seen). Violations after perma chat silence result in long, but not perma bans.

Now most verbaly toxic people are inclined to be asshats in other ways, and if they get reported for that, I feel like 6 month bans are more reasonable (try to keep reading if you havent downvoted already everyone). If a player comes back to an account 6 months later, they will be half a year older, and perhaps a bit more mature. Also theyve been permanently chat silenced, so they wont be calling people slurs, they can still intentionally feed, but then they can go away for another 6 months. A year older, and perhaps a bit more mature, they may... may finally at least treat the account with more care.

Now I know this doesnt seem that important, but consider this. If they come back to an account after 6 months, it probably had some kind of investment, and this account will not be able to see, or send chat. The only thing they can do is play the game.

I believe this is the best solution to stop the toxic novel writers, to get them focused on the game instead of the people in it, and reduce the time the spend ruining the experience of beginners. I arived at the concept of a perma chat silence because there are so many threads of players who just cant seem to avoid using the chat in a negative way, but want to be able to.

I feel a perma chat silence is the most reasonable way for us to have the people with attitude problems do what we all want, and thats to shut up and play. Some people will yes abandon the perma silence account, and for them it is no different than a perma ban. For those who just cant stop themselves from arguing with trolls, they wont flip to being one. Its what I call the "radicalization point." The point where they go from from screaming in chat at people they perceive to be the reason we cant have nice things, to being one of the trolls in vengeance against the system.

Once again, I appreciate that you were willing to stay in this long and explain your thoughts on the subject. While we may ultimately disagree on even my refined point here, I respect your willingness to discuss it.

I would be interested to know if you believe a perma chat silence (cant use, or see chat) would have some small (or large) impact on behavior, and the perception/experience of the community?

They already tried permamute. Players shifted from verbal to gameplay trolling.

{quoted}

Well I thank you for fully explaining your position, its difficult to have a conversation about this, and few people are willing to explain why they feel the way they do.

Yeah, I get it. It is rare to have conflicting, passionately held opinions be discussed civilly. I appreciate your opinions as well, and also that you have given them thought, rather than just "STAHP BANNING PEOPLE (AND BY PEOPLE I MEAN ME)". The way I see it, perma bans are an ugly attempt to solve an ugly problem.

It may be worth it to do that for the less-offensive chats that eventually lead to a permaban in today's system, but overall giving continuing chat restrictions I don't feel is the right solution either.

After giving it some thought, though, there may be some opportunity for more frequent notifications of IFS validated negative behavior. It would be interesting to see this done, possibly in two ways.

First, there is the obvious. We know that IFS tracks reported negative behavior, regardless if it gets you punished or not. AN opportunity for Riot would be to use the "bad, but not quite punishable behavior" as a sort of warning. Many people have said that they are banned without warning. Though I am a firm believer that a 14-day ban is a giant warning sign saying "STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING", I can understand if some don't quite get it. If Riot used these non-punished-but-bad-behavior incidents, and issued a warning, it might do a lot to curb the negative behavior.

On the non-reported behavior side, I wonder if it would be a good idea to issue a similar warning, saying that "while you they were not reported or punished for that game, in most games that would have likely been reported, and possibly punished for that behavior".

I think doing one, or both, of these would help to prevent some people from continuing bad (punishable) behavior. It would give people ample notification that their behavior is out of line.

That being said, people being given ample warnings would also means punishment would need to be rather harsh. I don;t think the current system needs to be harsher , but the current system could stay as-is, in terms of punishment levels.

Adding these warnings has a few benefits:

1. People age given more opportunity to see that their behavior is unacceptable.
2. People have more frequent. and timely, opportunity to know that they need to change their behavior and/or their account's precarious position.
3. Riot can plainly state: we have given you all the warnings in the world, you chose to ignore them, so you chose to have your account punished.

What are your thoughts on that?