Rule 4: Enjoy Yourself, but not at Anyone Else's Expense

The Ecdysiast·Nov 21, 2016·15 votes·2,234 views

If you enjoy playing the game while drunk or high, that's fine.

You're free to do so in the following situations:

A custom game consisting of you and only you as a human player.
A PvP game where the only players on your team are friends who have agreed to let you do that.

There is no loophole in the rules that allows players to hinder themselves or the team at the expense of whoever they've been randomly allied with.

Edit:

Though Tiredness and Drunkenness have the same symptoms, there is one glaring difference. Tiredness is not a state the player chooses to be in. It's akin to a player simply being bad at this game. Drunkenness requires consumption of a specific substance known to inhibit performance in every activity. Drinking is akin to willingly walking your character into the enemy base with intent to die.

It's fine if you've had a long day and want to wind down with some LoL OR alcohol, but don't ruin it for others by mixing the two.

51 Comments

AeroWaffleNov 21, 20167 votes

I feel like holding someone accountable for being drunk in a game is a slippery slope. Do we start holding someone accountable for starting a game while tired? What about starting a game in a distracting environment?

bad arcade kittyNov 21, 20163 votes

{quoted}

I feel like holding someone accountable for being drunk in a game is a slippery slope. Do we start holding someone accountable for starting a game while tired? What about starting a game in a distracting environment?

basically this

not to forget they have no way to prove them being drunk

to have a rule saying "people who say that they are drunk should be banned" is simply silly

Jon1174Nov 21, 20162 votes

Agreed

The EcdysiastNov 21, 20161 votes

Well, you can't say the N-word or that you'll rape someone.

So admitting drunkenness should be met with the same intolerance.

bad arcade kittyNov 21, 20162 votes

{quoted}

Well, you can't say the N-word or that you'll rape someone.

So admitting drunkenness should be met with the same intolerance.

firstly i don't see how saying that you are drunk is in any way related to using racist or sex-related slurs

secondly i find that rule that it's bannable is retarded too, it should be punished with chat restrictions

The EcdysiastNov 22, 20162 votes

Oh no, I agree. In fact most of the threads you'll find that ask for chat punishments to be strictly on chat rather than play are written by me.

I'm just saying that the player's word is taken as evidence in those cases. You call someone an n-word, that's all the proof they need that you did in fact do that. You say you'll rape someone, though it's obvious that won't happen, your word still acts as proof to ban you for the threat.

Sona PingNov 21, 20163 votes

{quoted}

I feel like holding someone accountable for being drunk in a game is a slippery slope. Do we start holding someone accountable for starting a game while tired? What about starting a game in a distracting environment?

Dude...

You are literally naming the fallacy of your argument in your argument.

AeroWaffleNov 21, 20163 votes

Okay. What's different between holding someone accountable for choosing to play while drunk, and choosing to play while very tired? Heck, you could even argue that someone that is tired is even more aware of their condition, thus more accountable. Whereas someone drunk may not have the right state of mind to realize that they're too drunk to play.

Sona PingNov 21, 20162 votes

One is that they are drunk the other is that they are tired. Now you are making a false equivalence instead.

Being drunk is being drunk and that's different from other things. If one chooses so, one can hold someone as violating rules for being drunk and not for other things.

In the legal system, we do it all the time! You can't be drunk in public, for example.

AeroWaffleNov 21, 20162 votes

But they result in the same symptoms. In fact, research has even shown that being tired affects your body in the same ways as being drunk.

In addition, you have no sure way to determine if someone is drunk in game. The best you can manage to prove is that they said they were drunk.

Sona PingNov 21, 20162 votes

But nothing. Repeating the same false equivalency doesn't change that you are making a Slippery Slope argument which invalidates it.

Caffeine and Cocaine are both psychoactive drugs but them both having a stimulant effect doesn't mean they are the same.

AeroWaffleNov 21, 20162 votes

The only interaction you have with this player is through the league game. If disability A and disability B both cause the same effect in league, then they should be treated equally.

One should not be held accountable for drinking before a video game, just like how they are not held accountable if they were just tired, distracted or tilting. Playing poorly is it's own punishment and is caused by a great number of things, including being inebriated, sick, injured or even playing with faulty hardware (such as a malfunctioning mouse).

But just because you don't like the idea of someone taking an intoxicant before enjoying one's self in a video game doesn't mean they should be additionally punished for that specific handicap.

Just like you can't be certain of each player's skill, you can't be certain of each player's mental or physical state. If you wanted to control those things you're free to create your own group and queue together.

Sona PingNov 21, 20161 votes

{quoted}

But just because you don't like the idea of someone taking an intoxicant before enjoying one's self in a video game doesn't mean they should be additionally punished for that specific handicap.

I never said that. This is an assumption of yours.

One should not be held accountable for drinking before a video game, just like how they are not held accountable if they were just tired, distracted or tilting.

So is this. This is your conclusion and you need to support it, and you need to do so by saying things that are true and accurate but what you have only done is...

If disability A and disability B both cause the same effect in league, then they should be treated equally.

keep repeating the same false equivalency and that doesn't change anything. You are just continuing on with your slippery slope argument that does not fly because...

{quoted}

I feel like holding someone accountable for being drunk in a game is a slippery slope. Do we start holding someone accountable for starting a game while tired? What about starting a game in a distracting environment?

If things are the same then they should be treated equally, like you have said, then things that are different should be treated differently. I and anyone else past a certain age can tell you, there is a large difference between being drunk, staying up late, or overhearing your roommate on the phone.

Playing poorly is it's own punishment and is caused by a great number of things, including being inebriated, sick, injured or even playing with faulty hardware (such as a malfunctioning mouse).

And on the topic of malfunctioning hardware, like faulty wi-fi that causes disconnects, you know what happens to those players who play on such connections right?

It's not just its own punishment, it punishes everyone else in the game. That provides impetus and justifies moderating actions on these people, people who knowingly choose to engage in behaviour that is detrimental to other people in the game.

There is no contradiction or hypocrisy in principle. There is a huge difference.

eldurisNov 21, 20165 votes

I think your argument contains a fallacy in itself:

Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false.

While AeroWaffle's argument might contain a fallacy, it's not to say that there are no good points. Being tired and being drunk are both states of mind which inhibit your gameplay. If you hold someone accountable for being drunk, it could be said that you also intend to hold them accountable for being tired. Both have relatively the same effect on gameplay.

Ultimately, I think that we shouldn't report someone just for being drunk. But if they're intentionally playing bad or off trolling, then I think it's worth the effort. They will likely exhibit other reportable behaviors if they're being belligerent, so report them for those instead.

Stars ShaperNov 21, 20162 votes

Except that you don't choose to be tired, it's just what happens after a normal day of activity. Instead, you choose to drink enough to make you drunk or smoke whatever you do, and thus using it as an excuse for poor performance should be considered as bad as trolling.

Am I to be forgiven to play with numb hands because I happen to rest with my arms under the pillow?

AeroWaffleNov 21, 20163 votes

Yes, but you control when you play.

You've made the choice to play a league of legends game despite your condition, just like someone would choose to play league despite being tipsy or drunk.

Sona PingNov 21, 20161 votes

{quoted}

I think your argument contains a fallacy in itself:

While AeroWaffle's argument might contain a fallacy, it's not to say that there are no good points. Being tired and being drunk are both states of mind which inhibit your gameplay. If you hold someone accountable for being drunk, it could be said that you also intend to hold them accountable for being tired. Both have relatively the same effect on gameplay.

Ultimately, I think that we shouldn't report someone just for being drunk. But if they're intentionally playing bad or off trolling, then I think it's worth the effort. They will likely exhibit other reportable behaviors if they're being belligerent, so report them for those instead.

I'm aware of that one. It does not. Notice I have not made an argument or position in the first place and I haven't even said anything about his conclusion. So that's actually irrelevant, regardless of use. I only commented how funny it was that he specifically pointed out how his own argument is unreasonable. If he has a conclusion, he should give argument to convince others of it but all he has done is double-down on repeating his slippery slope.

And like c'mon. This "it could be said that you also intend to hold them accountable for being tired." is an assumption, one in the exact same vein as the previous assumption and you are repeating his false equivalency again.

Question: Should someone who tells his teammate " stop feeding u worthless %&$# *$#(@" for losing lane be eligible for punishment?

If they are, doesn't that mean that you must also punish people who write "Would you just play safe so you stop dying" or someone who writes "stop going alone or we're going to lose"? Do we start punishing people who write "you all need to be careful or we'll throw" or anything like that? Because they are all similarly criticizing teammates for their play and criticism can create similar negative atmosphere.

No, it doesn't mean that. Having similarities does not mean they are identical nor does it mean that there must be a further progression.

Just like there is no reason that you would be unable to chat restrict the first guy and leave the others be, there is no contradiction here either. All Aerowaffle has written was a fallacious scare tactic using an unreasonable scenario of people being punished for playing League when their family has the TV too loud.

eldurisNov 21, 20163 votes

I'm just trying to point out that your own posts aren't without fallacy, like the strawman you present in this one. But just because the post contains a fallacy does not mean it doesn't bring up a good point.

You're saying that it sucks to get in a game with someone who chooses to enter a game while intoxicated and then ends up feeding all game and ruining your experience. I get that, I've felt that frustration myself.

AeroWaffle is saying that implementing such a rule would set a precedent for people to be punished for things they do out of game.

Both of you are bringing valid points to the table. I'm of the opinion that you should only ever be punished in the game for things that you do in the game. If you get drunk and play, that's fine, but if you get drunk and decide to ruin the game for 4 other people, that's not. Report them for their behavior, not what they choose to do out of the game.

Sona PingNov 21, 20161 votes

{quoted}

I'm just trying to point out that your own posts aren't without fallacy, like the strawman you present in this one. But just because the post contains a fallacy does not mean it doesn't bring up a good point.

You're saying that it sucks to get in a game with someone who chooses to enter a game while intoxicated and then ends up feeding all game and ruining your experience. I get that, I've felt that frustration myself.

AeroWaffle is saying that implementing such a rule would set a precedent for people to be punished for things they do out of game.

Both of you are bringing valid points to the table. I'm of the opinion that you should only ever be punished in the game for things that you do in the game. If you get drunk and play, that's fine, but if you get drunk and decide to ruin the game for 4 other people, that's not. Report them for their behavior, not what they choose to do out of the game.

I have not used any and that's not something you should baseless accusations about, for whatever reason you did so. It's poor form. What I have done: I have mentioned his fallacies, fallacies so obvious they mirror constructed examples you find. You raised the question of whether or not I used a fallacy. I answered that; I haven't. I have said nothing about his conclusion. I would like to see a good point to support it.

The next thing I wrote: that's not a strawman, that's a comparison. You might call it an analogy. Saying that you must punish distracted people because you would punish people who are too drunk to play because they are both impaired to some extent is just like saying you must punish anyone who says something critical of their because you punish players who say "kill yourself" because both are negative.

Both of these deny degree and difference and both are ridiculous and unreasoned. Analogies and comparison are not strawmen.

AeroWaffle is saying that implementing such a rule would set a precedent for people to be punished for things they do out of game.

1 . He did not actually argue that; that's what you have substituted something as his argument, which ironically, is the reason Strawmanning is a fallacy. 2 . Arguing that a precedent dictates what comes next, even to extreme, IS the Slippery Slope Fallacy. 3 . We already do that. Choice in wi-fi hardware, for example

If you get drunk and play, that's fine, but if you get drunk and decide to ruin the game for 4 other people, that's not.

Then we have similar, reasonable opinions.

I understand that you decide to step in to be a moderate and fair middle in this conversation. However, an important thing to understand is that taking the middle does not mean fairness and is instead being distinctly unfair. Especially if one makes unfounded aspersing accusations at one side in order "to even it out".

eldurisNov 21, 20163 votes

[{quoted}](name=Sona Ping,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fM6gMuBI,comment-id=0000000100000000000000000001000100000000,timestamp=2016-11-21T19:57:56.657+0000) 1 . He did not actually argue that; that's what you have substituted something as his argument, which ironically, is the reason Strawmanning is a fallacy.

Actually, that's exactly what he's saying in his original post:

{quoted}

I feel like holding someone accountable for being drunk in a game is a slippery slope. Do we start holding someone accountable for starting a game while tired? What about starting a game in a distracting environment?

He's not talking about fallacies at all in this post. When he says "slippery slope", he's referring to the precedent that could be set for punishing someone just for being drunk (or at least, that's how I interpret it.) It's a valid concern and I agree with him. If you're punished while playing League of Legends, it should be only for things you did while you played League of Legends. Your outside life should not affect your League account status.

Let's not get distracted on talk about fallacies and arguments about arguing. If we're going to discuss anything here in Player Behavior & Moderation, let it be player behavior and moderation.

Sona PingNov 22, 20161 votes

No, I already know he isn't talking about a fallacy. He is using one and he just so happens to be naming the one that he is using! That was the point, and I have been clear on that.

Let's not get distracted on talk about fallacies and arguments about arguing. If we're going to discuss anything here in Player Behavior & Moderation, let it be player behavior and moderation.

If we are discussing what should be done about player behavior and moderation, it is very important that one's arguments for doing something concerning player behavior and moderation be valid and supported by basic reasoning skills. And not suggesting one negative action cannot even be brought up for discussion because of superficial similarities to other actions.

It's just as face-smackingly ridiculous an argument as those people who make threads about how it was wrong that they got banned because other people did minor things and didn't get banned.

When he says "slippery slope", he's referring to the precedent that could be set for punishing someone just for being drunk

He clearly has not. You quoted it yourself. His statement is about how it is unacceptable to consider this instance of hindering your team because "What's next? Do we start punishing for these other things that are kinda similar in some way?" You missed that

What's different between holding someone accountable for choosing to play while drunk, and choosing to play while very tired?

he does this

In fact, research has even shown [weasel words] that being tired affects your body in the same ways as being drunk.

multiple times.

He made a form-fitting example of an invalid argument that automatically fails to support anything. Like saying "Feathers cannot be dark, because they are light."

It doesn't work.

The EcdysiastNov 21, 20162 votes

Tiredness can be equated to a lack of skill at the game in general.

Drunkenness cannot, as the player actively chooses to make themselves into such a state, just as players actively choose to run into the enemy base.

The problem with Waffle's argument is that he's equating something that requires a conscious decision to one that doesn't.

eldurisNov 21, 20163 votes

If a player on your team is running into the enemy base and feeding them, drunk or not, they can be punished for that.

If a player on your team is playing badly, drunk or not, they cannot be punished for that alone.

While being drunk might influence your state of mind and decision-making, it will have no impact on if you get punished or not. Only your in-game behavior and actions will.

The EcdysiastNov 22, 20162 votes

Which leaves it up to how often they get reported, whether or not they win the game.

AeroWaffleNov 21, 20163 votes

Choosing to play while tired is as much of a conscious decision as choosing to play while drunk.

The EcdysiastNov 22, 20162 votes

In both cases, it's a semi-conscious decision. As you've pointed out, the state of mind is similar.

The difference lies in choosing to be in that state of mind in the first place prior to logging on. Playing drunk requires two wrong decisions.

AeroWaffleNov 22, 20163 votes

That's the line that I believe shouldn't be crossed. You're asking that players be judged for actions unrelated and outside of league.

One should be judged purely from their actions inside of league. What a person does outside of league is not Riot's or any other customer's business.

If you want to punish someone for intentionally feeding while drunk, punish them for intentionally feeding. Being drunk doesn't remove their responsibility. But the mere possibility that they're drunk shouldn't warrant a punishment by itself.

The EcdysiastNov 21, 20161 votes

Oh hey Ping, wassup.

AeroWaffleNov 22, 20162 votes

You keep saying that it is a false equivalency.

I argue that they should be treated the same because they both result in similar effects on a person's capability of playing league. And that's what should matter to those who play league with these players, not if one is more frowned on by society more.

But all you've given as a counter argument when I asked what the difference was, "One is that they are drunk the other is that they are tired."

Caffeine and Cocaine are both psychoactive drugs but them both having a stimulant effect doesn't mean they are the same.

You provide this comparison, but still don't give me an actual answer.

What is the difference, from the perspective of their behavior inside of league, between playing poorly because you're drunk, and playing poorly because you're tired?

Sona PingNov 22, 20161 votes

I have provided you with the answer already. Multiple times. The point is this

I argue that they should be treated the same because they both result in similar effects on a person's capability of playing league.

Similar ≠ same. Similar acknowledges that they are different. Different things are treated differently. Not only is it irrational to treat different things as identical things but it's dodging discussion and further trying to insist on some inexorable mandate to proceed to treat anything remotely similar in that manner. i.e. slippery slope

Allowing dogs into a store does not mean horses will soon be forced to be allowed, regardless of their similarities. Nor does not allowing horses mean it's contradictory to allow dogs. Because they are different and not the same.

{quoted}

I feel like holding someone accountable for being drunk in a game is a slippery slope. Do we start holding someone accountable for starting a game while tired? What about starting a game in a distracting environment?

Choosing to take drugs that impair muscle coordination is not the same as being in a house when your family has the TV on. Yet you are insisting otherwise.

AeroWaffleNov 22, 20162 votes

You didn't answer the question, you just threw more analogies that can't compare to the current situation.

Similar ≠ same. Similar acknowledges that they are different. Different things are treated differently. Not only is it irrational to treat different things as identical things but it's dodging discussion and further trying to insist on some inexorable mandate to proceed to treat anything remotely similar in that manner. i.e. slippery slope

Riot treats racism, sexism, and extreme verbal abuse the same, because they are equally harmful to the community. They may be different, but they get the same treatment because the result is the same.

So once again. Why should we treat someone willingly playing the game while drunk any differently than a person willingly playing the game while very tired? They both made the decision while their capability was hampered, and both can have the same hindrance to how they play.

So why demand that players should be banned purely from playing while drunk, but find it acceptable for a player to start the game while tired or distracted?

The EcdysiastNov 21, 20161 votes

And that they said they were drunk is enough. Just as saying you're intentionally feeding or calling someone an n-word is enough.

Even as a joke, they're choosing to make the risk of providing their own word as solid proof that they're breaking the rules.

AeroWaffleNov 21, 20162 votes

If I were to say, "I'm drunk", but play perfectly acceptable, should I be banned?

The EcdysiastNov 22, 20161 votes

Well, yes. Or at least suffer the first step in the punishment process.

Then you've learned not to say that.

The EcdysiastNov 21, 20162 votes

Look at the difference when someone drives, and you'll see.

One's an accident, one is manslaughter.

Stars ShaperNov 21, 20163 votes

There is a huge difference between being tired/distracted and being drunk/high.

In car accidents the latters make you accountable for it.

Mecha JaxNov 21, 20162 votes

As far as the league of legends drunk/high argument goes I see it as a gray area, if the player is drunk and basically running down mid tower saying lolz so drunk then yah thats an easy ban but if he is like playing 0/5 garen top where he is trying to farm and just play normally then I have no problem with it. I also think trying to find out who is drunk/high is hard to prove since a lot of kids lie to look cool online.

All that aside I am 99% sure that you are accountable in both situations since being tired or distracted by the wheel does not make the accident any less your fault than being under the influence of any alcohol or drug.

VisthaNov 21, 20161 votes

Pretty sure are held accountable for both + a bonus for driving while drunk.

jeanne mulaneyNov 22, 20161 votes

Blatantly incorrect. If you're driving tired and hit a kid you're still going to get tried for negligent driving, same with being distracted. You're literally wrong in this post. Regardless of this analogy, I agree with AeroWaffle here. If we're going to make it bannable for someone to play the game drunk we open up the way for a lot of other ridiculous bans. If a person is drunk in your game and trying their damndest to win just leave them alone. The only time it should get you banned is when you use it as an excuse to troll.

Stars ShaperNov 21, 20163 votes

This should be Rule 1 and announced with trumpets each time you attempt to start a game.

ZT XperimentorNov 21, 20162 votes

Addendum: This includes badgering your teamates for off-meta picks.

XidphelNov 21, 20161 votes

If someone badgers 2-man group, pick Teemo and Cass.

The EcdysiastNov 22, 20161 votes

But that also includes picking off-meta champions in the first place without any proof that it'll work.

I don't mean proof of performance, but some sort of logic as to why something would work.

Here's some examples of what I mean by proof:

Logic: Kindred top. She has good harass against melee opponents and can dance around them while dealing her damage. She can possibly build defense items earlier due to the strength of her passive, which also does well against bruisers and tanks that normally go top.

Performance: Vel'koz ADC. I've done this successfully quite often-- which is also supported by the logic that helped it work in the first place. Along with having heaps his own CC (which is why he can support well), enough base damage on his ultimate to pick up on kills that escape, and his passive remains on a target for as long as you're AAing them.

Where logic fails: Singed Support. He has an AoE slow and a conditional root that almost requires that you miss the slow in the first place. His main playstyle and effectiveness is in pushing waves to have minions take towers. The CC isn't enough to compete with the much heavier CC supports that one would normally see, and the playstyle is the exact opposite of what the Support role is intended for.

ZT XperimentorNov 22, 20161 votes

Frankly I don't care anymore about the singed support since the past couple weeks had several posts debating it.

My point is that you'd be surprised what works if you apply some imagination & ingenuity. For example no one expects you to peel as a blitzcrank, but man is it satisfying to wait for the enemy assassin to dash towards the carry, only to be yanked away. The only champions I could see having significant problems being played outside of their comfort zones would be vladimir & mordekaiser.

Jon1174Nov 21, 20161 votes

I Feel Like Ive Seen This Topic Somewhere Bard

VerxintNov 21, 20161 votes

A lot of people play while drunk or high, they just don't talk about it.

Most of the people who say they're drunk are just children who think they sound cool

LegendaryLemurNov 22, 20161 votes

"Enjoy Yourself, but not at Anyone Else's Expense". So queueing as non-support is not allowed?

The EcdysiastNov 22, 20161 votes

Enjoy yourself

Queuing as support isn't allowed. :^)

Z StatisticNov 22, 20161 votes

The "At anyone's expense" stipulation is a stupid rule. One could say that not picking a meta champion (not even simply Mundo adc bot. Just not picking Lucian or Vayne bot) is "at someone's expense." It also could be "I play best with Shaco support. Pick shaco support for me, pls" and then picking Leona.

Also, tiredness is a direct consequence of the person's actions by not sleeping. No one is holding a gun to your head to play ranked at 3 am.

"Don't be a jerk" and "do everything you say you're gonna do" is pretty reasonable if you define 'jerk' as physical injury and 'agree' as via contract instead of just word.

All of this "mutual respect" is too gray. I don't give a fuck if some random twat calls me a %%%%%%. Does that mean I can call others that since I don't care? If no, then obviously it's not mutual. I think the feedback system of the Tribunal is good, but simply banning them it honestly missing the point. I've watched this community go from relatively decent to completely uptight busybodies of the course of 6 seasons.

I think Lyte's first hint should have been when he saw that only 5% of the 'toxicity' was being done by 1% of the playerbase (the worst behaved individuals.)

Mister PunchesNov 23, 20161 votes

Personally, when I see that someone says "I'm high/drunk lol", I find it extremely unbelievable, given that it's easily one of the biggest excuses in this game. I find it unbelievable for two things:

1: Like you mentioned in your edit, drinking inhibits every activity. For me, I drink a bit, but when I do, I don't play League. I know for sure that when I get buzzed or even drunk, I am in no position to play, since my fine motor functions are inhibited and affected. Typing on a computer requires these fine motor skills, and playing League definitely requires these fine motor skills. Same thing when someone says they're high. The problem I have with that is that marijuana is still illegal in most states in NA, and even then, the bulk of this community is below the age of 21. In California, it's finally legal to possess 1oz of marijuana, but only for people who are 21 or over. I doubt that people in this forum have the capability to get marijuana easily.

2: The age of this community is at that point where being drunk or high is "cool". I've experienced both already. It's not what people think it is. When I was 13-17, I thought it would be cool to act drunk or sound drunk when I was trying to impress others. All it did was make me look like a jerk to my teammates in the games I played. Now, I know both feelings directly, and both aren't cool. I drink with friends just to relax, and when I was 18, I did the stereotypical college freshman experience and got high. It sucks when you have a paper due the next morning and you're still feeling the effects of being crossfaded. Don't do it.

Basically, I agree with you, OP. I have an extremely hard time believing that people on this forum would play drunk or at the very least, type semi-coherent sentences. I share your sentiment OP: Please, if someone has to drink or smoke to have fun, don't screw over your teammates with your "fun".