Boards›Player Behavior

Why doesn't riot mute someone permanently before perma-banning them?

Böx·1/31/2019, 8:17:18 AM·1 votes·2,577 views

Hey Riot,

It has been a year and half since I lost my main account with many skins purchased and many of my close friends added now lost (don't remember usernames). I do take full responsibility for my toxic ways. I just don't understand why you guys don't implement a system where you just permanently mute the player instead of just perma-banning them. I totally believe that players can change and that some people do have anger issues...I understand that. I feel like it is totally unfair that I just get so triggered when my team just trolls me by afking or flaming me for picking Shaco support. Why don't you guys just perma ban an account if they start to INT after a perma mute? I feel like that is much more fair. I would like to come back to league and play. I really miss the game and I am totally reformed now. I feel like this system is so much more better. People are human and some people have bad days....so they take it out on the game. I'm sorry and hopefully this can bring some light to the situation.

Thank you, Box

26 Comments

Umbral Regent1/31/2019, 9:41:39 AM6 votes

They tried what amounted to a permanent chat restriction/mute before, and the result was that people under those longer-duration chat restricts (they basically indefinitely scaled) would simply resort to intentional feeding and trolling to express their contempt for their team.

As to the question "why not permamute and wait 'til they int/troll to ban them?" - there are two things about that.

First and foremost, is that intentionally feeding and trolling are hard to actually verify, and it can take a while before a troll or intentional feeder is caught. That could lead to them trolling/feeding several games before finally getting the boot.

Second, if they go out of their way to misbehave and ignore the rules over and over and over, they don't deserve an umpteenth chance on top of all the ones they've blown. Why give them an extra opportunity to break the rules and disappoint? If they were going to reform, they'd do it after the first punishment, or the second, or the third.

So, Riot cuts out the middleman and doesn't give players that extra opportunity to troll/feed by having chat-related penalties ultimately result in a permanent ban.

Jamaree1/31/2019, 8:42:36 AM5 votes

They used to with the chat restriction system, it didn't work.

ModPrandine1/31/2019, 9:39:51 AM4 votes

If you had done some research you'd have known that while in theory it could work, in practice it doesn't as the people who want to harass others will simply switch to a new method of doing so once they can't through chat. This means that it's not chat that's the problem, but rather the players who insist on abusing and harassing others no matter what. 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?

Sukishoo1/31/2019, 3:19:48 PM3 votes

Because that's not a legit solution for trying to stop negative behavior.

Riot wants people to be able to communicate with each other. Chat restrictions that are in place are just as a warning really. As those usually get people to stop behaving badly after one or two. The ones that then go on to the ban phase are generally the ones who don't return.

If they had things like a permanent chat restriction, that player could end up being subjected to people thinking they were trolling to begin with cause they couldn't respond. It'd just cause Riot more issues and since they've tried stuff like it that didn't workout it's better for them to just use what they have.

GatekeeperTDS1/31/2019, 11:24:09 AM2 votes

For the umpteenth time, Riot has specifically stated that they don't want to find ways to keep incredibly toxic people playing and spending money, they want them to stop playing.

As others have stated, they did the constantly-increasing chat restriction previously. It didnt't work.

PH451/31/2019, 10:33:22 AM1 votes

As others have said, they tried it, and it didn't prove to be a working system, hence they didn't keep it.

Ph03n1xb1rd1/31/2019, 12:21:53 PM1 votes

Because that way the player would still play on this account, but probably not buy new things to it, because it is a "handicapped" account. So overall Rito would lose profit on this.

The Rito fanboy explanation: ThEy wIlL StArT FeEdInG!