Report system doesnt work

OldDirtay·Oct 31, 2015·12 votes·4,456 views

it doesnt, dont tell me it does

i wont say who, but in my last game someone said nothing all game and kept running down midlane feeding kills as soon as he spawned, bought all tears, and has done this in the last 7 of his last 20 games...oh and built ALL tears

1-i didnt get a msg saying he got punished 2-chatting wasnt the problem, nor did he even say anything all game so this shouldnt even be a punishment in this case 3-he is in another game right now 4- he has done this in almost 50% of his games in his history 5-he que'd for another game instantly after game so he has no long que punishment either

is this fair? do you literally have to do this for 8+ games in a row to even be considered for this? i can guarentee the 28 people who had their games ruined reported him for what h did (intentional feeding)

so this report system works? tell me why? ive proven why it doesnt so your turn to tell me why it does (and im not talking about chat, idc when people flame because i mute them, im talking people who make it impossible to win via not playing and intentionally feeding)

so @riot what do you got to say about this situation?

86 Comments

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20156 votes

I just decided to investigate on my own and within 30 seconds confirmed for myself everything the original poster said, why cant Riot take the time, why is the forums a greater priority than the in game experience? Why can riot not invest on a few lines from an actual person to interact with the aforementioned player sooner, especially after it has been brought to attention? I don't understand it. Riot is creating a toxic environment by low prioritizing it as much as the offenders actions truth be told.

Archon XOct 31, 20154 votes

I looked at his match history and I'll be putting in a support ticket about him

OldDirtayOct 31, 20154 votes

honestly riot is just as much at fault as he is, theyve let people do this for years and they just refuse to fix this system thats broken

they went from people judging to a computer, but i mean ive played this game for almost 3 years now and ive seen posts of people doing worse (30+ games in a row buying all mobi boots and going 0/30) and they literally never got punished

i just find it amazing how they are in denial that the system doesnt work and they preach it does even in loading screen/forums

the main problem isnt people like this, its how riot continues to not fix this problem so they get punished for doing it period....not 100 games later

JubbinautOct 31, 20154 votes

{quoted}

1-i didnt get a msg saying he got punished

This is meaningless. Those messages are only sent to the player(s) who reported them in the game that triggered their case. So you not receiving one doesn't mean a case hasn't been - or won't be - built against them. It only means that your report was not the trigger.

2-chatting wasnt the problem, nor did he even say anything all game so this shouldnt even be a punishment in this case

Intentional feeding is a punishable thing.

3-he is in another game right now

Which means the system hasn't caught him - yet.

4- he has done this in almost 50% of his games in his history

Which means the system will catch him.

5-he que'd for another game instantly after game so he has no long que punishment either

Low-priority Queues are only issued by Leaverbuster as punishment for AFKs.

is this fair? do you literally have to do this for 8+ games in a row to even be considered for this? i can guarentee the 28 people who had their games ruined reported him for what h did (intentional feeding)

I'm sure they did as well. I'm also sure that the system will catch up to him. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it never will.

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20154 votes

{quoted}

I'm sure they did as well. I'm also sure that the system will catch up to him. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it never will.

The point is that the forums are far less impacting to the average players gaming experience than the aforementioned and the time it takes to respond to each shouldn't be so lopsided.

JubbinautOct 31, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000a0000,timestamp=2015-10-31T06:41:32.863+0000)

The point is that the forums are far less impacting to the average players gaming experience than the aforementioned and the time it takes to respond to each shouldn't be so lopsided.

I don't see what that has to do with OP's claims, or my own statements.

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20153 votes

{quoted}

I don't see what that has to do with OP's claims, or my own statements.

We got a quick response (within minutes) to the naming of the player to shed light on the issue, yet the player has gone on doing this for days (maybe weeks or longer). Seems like they need to rearrange their resources and/or priorities (Riot).

JubbinautOct 31, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000a000000000001,timestamp=2015-10-31T07:16:06.197+0000)

We got a quick response (within minutes) to the naming of the player to shed light on the issue, yet the player has gone on doing this for days (maybe weeks or longer). Seems like they need to rearrange their resources and/or priorities (Riot).

So... a non-Riot employee gave you attention here, quicker than the Instant Feedback system has taken to address this player.

And that has what to do with my points, or with the OP's claims?

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20153 votes

{quoted}

So... a non-Riot employee gave you attention here, quicker than the Instant Feedback system has taken to address this player.

And that has what to do with my points, or with the OP's claims?

Riot chooses where to place the forum and can control who moderates it (by creating their own or the renegotiation of terms with the third party or 100 other things), as a consumer ( I bought every Pantheon skin on 2 accounts) I am reasonably allowed to be dissatisfied if they delegate things out to a third party and they provide an unsatisfactory environment for my experience. I'm not asking for a refund, just stating that whoever can delete/edit my posts is a refection of riot regardless of who their boss is or how complex the series of third party's involved is.

OldDirtayOct 31, 20153 votes

{quoted}

This is meaningless. Those messages are only sent to the player(s) who reported them in the game that triggered their case. So you not receiving one doesn't mean a case hasn't been - or won't be - built against them. It only means that your report was not the trigger.

Intentional feeding is a punishable thing.

Which means the system hasn't caught him - yet.

Which means the system will catch him.

Low-priority Queues are only issued by Leaverbuster as punishment for AFKs. do you literally have to do this for 8+ games in a row to even be considered for this? i can guarentee the 28 people who had their games ruined reported him for what h did (intentional feeding)

I'm sure they did as well. I'm also sure that the system will catch up to him. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it never will.

so many wrong points, where to start

first, if he didnt get triggered by my report than that means he didnt get a punishment...hence this thread so im not sure where ur going with this

second, the system hasnt caught up with him yet....ns, again thats the point of this thread

third, the system will catch up with him? doing this in 30+ games out of your last hundred shows more towards the side he will not get punished rather than a punishment is coming...not sure where u were going with that...saying he will get punished is an assumption, saying he hasnt been punished is a fact

last and not least, you didnt answer if it was fair but ill go with common sense and think you think its unfair...to assume the system will catch up to him while it hasnt happened in 30+ games is a very big assumption, i have 30 cases of proving it wont while you have....0 to prove he will be

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20152 votes

{quoted}

so many wrong points, where to start

first, if he didnt get triggered by my report than that means he didnt get a punishment...hence this thread so im not sure where ur going with this

second, the system hasnt caught up with him yet....ns, again thats the point of this thread

third, the system will catch up with him? doing this in 30+ games out of your last hundred shows more towards the side he will not get punished rather than a punishment is coming...not sure where u were going with that...saying he will get punished is an assumption, saying he hasnt been punished is a fact

last and not least, you didnt answer if it was fair but ill go with common sense and think you think its unfair...to assume the system will catch up to him while it hasnt happened in 30+ games is a very big assumption, i have 30 cases of proving it wont while you have....0 to prove he will be

You sir are a gentleman and a scholar, I salute you! Well said.

JubbinautOct 31, 20152 votes

{quoted}

first, if he didnt get triggered by my report than that means he didnt get a punishment...hence this thread so im not sure where ur going with this

Sure. He didn't get a punishment from the game you played with him. That doesn't mean he won't get a punishment. Nor does it mean that he hasn't gotten a punishment in the past.

second, the system hasnt caught up with him yet....ns, again thats the point of this thread

You claim that it doesn't work at all. Which would require that he never receive a punishment. If the system catches up to him and punishes him, then - at least to some extent - that system must function.

So to claim that "because it hasn't happened on the arbitrary timetable I demand, it must not work at all" is more than a little unreasonable.

third, the system will catch up with him? doing this in 30+ games out of your last hundred shows more towards the side he will not get punished rather than a punishment is coming...not sure where u were going with that...saying he will get punished is an assumption, saying he hasnt been punished is a fact

It's a fact to the best of your knowledge. How far back did you look? Chronologically? A week? Two? A month? So, then, if he was punished two months ago, or 6 months ago, or a year ago, you wouldn't have seen the gap to indicate that.

Even so, it's not a fact that means much. "The sun has always risen" is also a fact, but that doesn't - in and of itself - mean that it will rise tomorrow.

last and not least, you didnt answer if it was fair but ill go with common sense and think you think its unfair...to assume the system will catch up to him while it hasnt happened in 30+ games is a very big assumption, i have 30 cases of proving it wont while you have....0 to prove he will be

You have a significant amount of evidence that demonstrates that he has not been punished within a fixed amount of time, yes. And it's true that I have no direct evidence of things that have not happened yet, because I am not precognitive, nor do I have the ability to travel through time.

On the other hand, I've seen cases like this before. Multiple times. And the thing they all have in common? They were all banned accounts - most of them were perma-banned.

So when I say that he will be, it's because I've seen it happen over and over and over again - just like you would claim that he will continue to feed, because you've looked at his log and seen it over and over and over again.

It's not a fact - it's merely a logical extrapolation of data.

To answer the question you didn't ask: Do I think the system is flawed or limited in some way? Yes. Yes, it absolutely is.

Some of that is intentional - it's tuned somewhat low to prevent false-positives (innocent players being punished), which is something I can't disagree with.

Some of it is unintentional - as it stands, there are certain types of behaviors that it doesn't handle very well.

Do either of those things mean that the system is "broken" at a fundamental level? No. Of course not. The system's not perfect - nothing ever is - and claiming or assuming that anything falling short of perfection is "broken" is short-sighted and foolish.

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Even so, it's not a fact that means much. "The sun has always risen" is also a fact, but that doesn't - in and of itself - mean that it will rise tomorrow.

The sun does not rise in relation to the earth, we spin around on an axis ever adjusting our perspective. Knowledge is power!

JubbinautOct 31, 20153 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000a000100010000,timestamp=2015-10-31T07:25:24.291+0000)

The sun does not rise in relation to the earth, we spin around on an axis ever adjusting our perspective. Knowledge is power!

I didn't invent the turn of phrase. I simply use it, because it's common parlance.

But perhaps you'd rather actually make a point, rather than showing that you passed the fourth grade? Because honestly, I already assumed as much - I don't need you to prove that.

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20152 votes

{quoted}

I didn't invent the turn of phrase. I simply use it, because it's common parlance.

But perhaps you'd rather actually make a point, rather than showing that you passed the fourth grade? Because honestly, I already assumed as much - I don't need you to prove that.

It matters very little who came up with the idea comparatively to how accurate it is, I can not chose your point of view or how you defend it but perhaps you should pick a more concise way to explain yourself rather than try and insult me.

JubbinautOct 31, 20153 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000a00010001000000000000,timestamp=2015-10-31T07:38:20.271+0000)

It matters very little who came up with the idea comparatively to how accurate it is

I'm sorry, did you fail to understand me because of my choice of phrasing?

If so, I deeply apologize, and will edit the earlier post with a more scientifically accurate statement.

If not, I don't really see a conflict here, since my point was clearly understood.

We are not discussing astronomy or astrophysics. We are discussing Riot Games' player behavior systems. The accuracy of a statement relating to the former is entirely irrelevant to the latter.

I can not chose your point of view or how you defend it but perhaps you should pick a more concise way to explain yourself rather than try and insult me.

I didn't insult you. Nor did I try. I did, however, indicate that attempting to "wow" me with 4th-grade science is a pointless endeavor, since I already assumed you held such knowledge.

There's really no point to insulting you, anyway. It's divisive and runs counter to my goals, here. Rather, I hoped to encourage you to actually discuss the issue at hand, rather than making inane tangents.

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20152 votes

{quoted}

I'm sorry, did you fail to understand me because of my choice of phrasing?

If so, I deeply apologize, and will edit the earlier post with a more scientifically accurate statement.

If not, I don't really see a conflict here, since my point was clearly understood.

We are not discussing astronomy or astrophysics. We are discussing Riot Games' player behavior systems. The accuracy of a statement relating to the former is entirely irrelevant to the latter.

I didn't insult you. Nor did I try. I did, however, indicate that attempting to "wow" me with 4th-grade science is a pointless endeavor, since I already assumed you held such knowledge.

There's really no point to insulting you, anyway. It's divisive and runs counter to my goals, here. Rather, I hoped to encourage you to actually discuss the issue at hand, rather than making inane tangents.

Please keep in mind it can be very hard to intemperate tone and or sarcasm in text. Let me end our side debate in hopes the original posters concerns receive proper attention.

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20152 votes

{quoted}

nor do I have the ability to travel through time.

Einstein disagrees, every clock on every satellite has minor time differentials due to gravity's influence on space time. In theory anyone "could" go to space and and travel in practice through time, alternatively speed also effects time and the faster you move the slower your time goes, every time you walk around, ride in a car or train, or even as you sit idle on our planet as it spins at rotates through the galaxy you are essentially time traveling (just in minute increments that will be incredibly hard to notice) relative to other points in the universe's space time.

Go go gadget physics!

JubbinautOct 31, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000a000100010001,timestamp=2015-10-31T07:34:33.390+0000)

Einstein disagrees, every clock on every satellite has minor time differentials due to gravity's influence on space time. In theory anyone "could" go to space and and travel in practice through time, alternatively speed also effects time and the faster you move the slower your time goes, every time you walk around, ride in a car or train, or even as you sit idle on our planet as it spins at rotates through the galaxy you are essentially time traveling (just in minute increments that will be incredibly hard to notice) relative to other points in the universe's space time.

Go go gadget physics!

Aside from that, I also travel through time at an approximate rate of 1 second per second.

It's true that I could perhaps have been more explicit in the travel requirements I lack - I cannot travel far enough into the future to gain such knowledge before others, nor can I travel back to now to share it.

But, frankly, I assumed we were all intelligent enough to understand my intent without the unnecessary side-discussion. I'm truly sorry if I somehow led you to make a different assumption.

OldDirtayOct 31, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Sure. He didn't get a punishment from the game you played with him. That doesn't mean he won't get a punishment. Nor does it mean that he hasn't gotten a punishment in the past.

You claim that it doesn't work at all. Which would require that he never receive a punishment. If the system catches up to him and punishes him, then - at least to some extent - that system must function.

So to claim that "because it hasn't happened on the arbitrary timetable I demand, it must not work at all" is more than a little unreasonable.

It's a fact to the best of your knowledge. How far back did you look? Chronologically? A week? Two? A month? So, then, if he was punished two months ago, or 6 months ago, or a year ago, you wouldn't have seen the gap to indicate that.

Even so, it's not a fact that means much. "The sun has always risen" is also a fact, but that doesn't - in and of itself - mean that it will rise tomorrow.

You have a significant amount of evidence that demonstrates that he has not been punished within a fixed amount of time, yes. And it's true that I have no direct evidence of things that have not happened yet, because I am not precognitive, nor do I have the ability to travel through time.

On the other hand, I've seen cases like this before. Multiple times. And the thing they all have in common? They were all banned accounts - most of them were perma-banned.

So when I say that he will be, it's because I've seen it happen over and over and over again - just like you would claim that he will continue to feed, because you've looked at his log and seen it over and over and over again.

It's not a fact - it's merely a logical extrapolation of data.

To answer the question you didn't ask: Do I think the system is flawed or limited in some way? Yes. Yes, it absolutely is.

Some of that is intentional - it's tuned somewhat low to prevent false-positives (innocent players being punished), which is something I can't disagree with.

Some of it is unintentional - as it stands, there are certain types of behaviors that it doesn't handle very well.

Do either of those things mean that the system is "broken" at a fundamental level? No. Of course not. The system's not perfect - nothing ever is - and claiming or assuming that anything falling short of perfection is "broken" is short-sighted and foolish.

i just have to, bc you just dont get it

we're both right, he didnt get punished....as far as evidence shows...it shows 30+ times he will not get punished and it showed 0 times he has/will be punished...how do i know he hasnt?look at the games...it shows you the dates played...i know numbers can be hard sometimes

i said it doesnt work at all because it doesnt....sure players do get banned for doing it, but thats after hundreds of games doing so....thats like saying we made 500 cars but only 1 works..i would say that company doesnt work as far as making cars but if you want to fight the exact words than yes it works, at a 1% rate out of 100

timetable i demand? first you seem selfrighteous with trying to be right, but otherwise i think someone should get banned after first or 2nd offense when it comes to intentionally feeding.....months of this going on with over 30 games of doing so is rediculous and to say it isnt....is just....idk the word....retarded?

how far did i look back? over a month, with them showing up least a couple times during every "load more" so id think its beyond safe to say its a habit of his....btw wether he got punished 2+months or a yr before hand is irrelevant, if he is doing it...he should be punished....if he got punished and he keeps doing it, he should be punished again.....id love to see how you think almost any of this...esp these comments....are logical by any means

the sun may not rise again? when it has a 100% rise rate for billions of years i think its safe to say it will rise again...am i psychic? no, but i can read facts and fact of the matter is it has a 100% rate over a long...long...period of time

i dont get this one, your agreeing i have evidence and you have none? really dont get where ur going with that one besides agreeing with me

sure you've seen cases of people being banned for it, as have i...but i have also seen plenty of cases where they didnt at all or for almost a year at a time (wish i remembered name but there was a thread that went on for months about this one guy who took mobis every game and went 0/30 for months and im talking 3+ like 10 games a day as if he had a bot doing it) he never got banned to my knowledge and it gained alot of hype because someone actually carried and won the game for him while he was 0/30+....again im sure youve seen people get charged for murder but to sit here and say nobody who commited murder never got charged is just dumb/down right stupidity

your saying he will be banned because you have no proof but seen other people get banned for it...while i say he wont be banned because he hasnt been and ive seen people not be banned over it.....difference between our statements? i have evidence of both him doing it unpunished and people not getting banned while you have a couple people who have been banned for it....2>1 and btw this goes back to the murder example i said

btw it is a fact

i did ask the question, because you cant read right doesnt mean i didnt ask it...on the first page to you i asked is it fair....nothing like the question you on the spot made up and answered...but the system is flawed and no it will never be perfect...but that also comes with an example, a car will never be perfect but they can get a hellova lot more than 1 mile a gallon....get my drift? prob not.....but it also doesnt have to be perfect to catch someone with 0 kills 10+ deaths and building all of one item (in this case tears)....will it ever be perfect, no, but it can get loads better than it is now and imo yes it is broken....if it cant ban people breaking the rules id say its broken, if it takes that same system 100's of games of people breaking the rules b4 it even considers them then id say its broken...again your trying to mince words

you just....dont get it.... lol plain and simple

JubbinautOct 31, 20152 votes

{quoted}

we're both right, he didnt get punished....as far as evidence shows...it shows 30+ times he will not get punished and it showed 0 times he has/will be punished...how do i know he hasnt?look at the games...it shows you the dates played...i know numbers can be hard sometimes

I never said - nor did I imply - that you "missed" a punishment during that period. I have taken as a given that he received no punishment whatsoever during the period you examined.

So can we drop the pointless backhanded insults implying that I "missed" that part?

i said it doesnt work at all because it doesnt....sure players do get banned for doing it, but thats after hundreds of games doing so....thats like saying we made 500 cars but only 1 works..i would say that company doesnt work as far as making cars but if you want to fight the exact words than yes it works, at a 1% rate out of 100

So... it works, but not all the time? That's rather different from "it doesn't work."

Less than optimally effective? Sure. Absolute failure? Nope.

timetable i demand? first you seem selfrighteous with trying to be right, but otherwise i think someone should get banned after first or 2nd offense when it comes to intentionally feeding.....months of this going on with over 30 games of doing so is rediculous and to say it isnt....is just....idk the word....retarded?

how far did i look back? over a month, with them showing up least a couple times during every "load more" so id think its beyond safe to say its a habit of his....btw wether he got punished 2+months or a yr before hand is irrelevant, if he is doing it...he should be punished....if he got punished and he keeps doing it, he should be punished again.....id love to see how you think almost any of this...esp these comments....are logical by any means

Well, let's look at it, then.

You claim he never received a punishment.

But if he received a punishment 2 months ago, then it cannot be true that he never received a punishment.

Since your entire argument is premised on the idea that he has never received a punishment, finding that he had would destroy that premise.

Which means recognizing the limitations of your data is extremely important.

the sun may not rise again? when it has a 100% rise rate for billions of years i think its safe to say it will rise again...am i psychic? no, but i can read facts and fact of the matter is it has a 100% rate over a long...long...period of time

Sure. But assuming that it will always have a 100% success rate just because it has had such so far is entirely illogical.

i dont get this one, your agreeing i have evidence and you have none? really dont get where ur going with that one besides agreeing with me

Sure I have evidence. But my evidence comes from players other than him. See, unless you think the system treats him differently than anyone else (which is a silly assumption), there's no reason to believe that his situation will be any different than any other.

And since, historically, we have seen these players being consistently banned - albeit often far later than we would prefer - we can therefore assume that it's likely that he will also receive punishment.

your saying he will be banned because you have no proof but seen other people get banned for it...while i say he wont be banned because he hasnt been and ive seen people not be banned over it.....difference between our statements? i have evidence of both him doing it unpunished and people not getting banned while you have a couple people who have been banned for it....2>1 and btw this goes back to the murder example i said

So if an intentional feeder hasn't been caught/punished yet, he'll never be found, because some intentional feeders aren't?

Can you explain the logic of this argument to me, please? Because best I can figure, you'd need at least 51% of intentional feeders to never be caught, in order to make that argument statistically valid. I don't know what the actual rate is, but I suspect it's rather lower than that.

i did ask the question, because you cant read right doesnt mean i didnt ask it...on the first page to you i asked is it fair....nothing like the question you on the spot made up and answered...but the system is flawed and no it will never be perfect...but that also comes with an example, a car will never be perfect but they can get a hellova lot more than 1 mile a gallon....get my drift? prob not.....but it also doesnt have to be perfect to catch someone with 0 kills 10+ deaths and building all of one item (in this case tears)....will it ever be perfect, no, but it can get loads better than it is now and imo yes it is broken....if it cant ban people breaking the rules id say its broken, if it takes that same system 100's of games of people breaking the rules b4 it even considers them then id say its broken...again your trying to mince words

You asked a question: "is this fair?" I chose not to answer, because it seemed rhetorical.

You assumed my answer, too. I chose not to comment on that, because you assumed correctly - of course it's not fair.

But whether or not this specific situation is fair isn't really an important question when discussing whether or not the system works at all.

You're saying that a relatively small failure rate means the system should be scrapped.

I'm saying that a relatively small failure rate sucks - but doesn't indicate that the system is broken.

Can the system be improved on? Absolutely. Definitely. Certainly. Yes, it can be improved on. And, fortunately, they've got teams working on exactly that.

But - and this is pretty important - "can be improved upon" is not at all the same thing as "utterly broken."

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20153 votes

I find it to be disgraceful and disrespectful to every player on the league how riot almost immediately responds to you identifying a player by name in the forums but lets the other issue which is much more impacting and more directly related to the game carry on and go unabated for hours (assuming 7 games). You identifying an issue and being specific is more of a priority than someone who ruined 28 other players night. Priorities riot, get them in check please.

ModMod CuratorOct 31, 20154 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2015-10-31T05:49:25.472+0000)

I find it to be disgraceful and disrespectful to every player on the league how riot almost immediately responds to you identifying a player by name in the forums but lets the other issue which is much more impacting and more directly related to the game carry on and go unabated for hours (assuming 7 games). You identifying an issue and being specific is more of a priority than someone who ruined 28 other players night. Priorities riot, get them in check please.

To be very clear, I am not a Rioter, hence not having a red name. The moderation team is here to help people have discussions on the Boards inside the Universal Rules set out by Riot. Any comment we might make about the in-game report system would not be on behalf of Riot which is what the OP was looking for.

OldDirtayOct 31, 20153 votes

{quoted}

To be very clear, I am not a Rioter, hence not having a red name. The moderation team is here to help people have discussions on the Boards inside the Universal Rules set out by Riot. Any comment we might make about the in-game report system would not be on behalf of Riot which is what the OP was looking for.

so as a person who probably plays league

this seems ok to you? for someone to do this with 0 punishments? btw if you cared to look he did this ALOT more than 7 games...that was just 7/20....

so does this seem ok to you? tell me in your own words either way

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20152 votes

{quoted}

To be very clear, I am not a Rioter, hence not having a red name. The moderation team is here to help people have discussions on the Boards inside the Universal Rules set out by Riot. Any comment we might make about the in-game report system would not be on behalf of Riot which is what the OP was looking for.

Riot is a business and they have allocated their resources in a way to suit their business model, regardless of your position you are in a place of some power, and for them to have resources to spend on such trivial matters while larger issues go unanswered is a huge problem. You may have no personal blame but the system is clearly flawed that the one issue is getting immediate attention while the other is left unchecked. If the player in question got 3 messages from a person of power rather than the victim seeking resolution then the post wouldn't have even been made. their mismanagement of resources and effort is leaving many of us in a difficult position. If your position was replaced with other positions to handle the original posters issue we wouldn't be spinning our wheels to begin with.

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000600000001,timestamp=2015-10-31T06:03:13.333+0000) If the player in question got 3 messages from a person of power rather than the victim seeking resolution then the post wouldn't have even been made.

Custom real responses not the automated generic ones ( I do appreciate you trying to help but the response time to this vs that is the bigger issue in my opinion).

OldDirtayOct 31, 20153 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2015-10-31T05:49:25.472+0000)

I find it to be disgraceful and disrespectful to every player on the league how riot almost immediately responds to you identifying a player by name in the forums but lets the other issue which is much more impacting and more directly related to the game carry on and go unabated for hours (assuming 7 games). You identifying an issue and being specific is more of a priority than someone who ruined 28 other players night. Priorities riot, get them in check please.

someone gets it

because saying X murdered X is bad

but X murdering X isnt bad enough to warrant punishment

riot logic at its finest

EvilDustManOct 31, 20153 votes

The system isn't designed to hit intentional feeders immediately after the game. If the person did this in your game and you reported it, it'll probably take some time. Yes, that person will continue to flail around and possibly make some games worse, but given the volume of players and the fact they'd rather be sure than hand out bad punishments, it's reasonable.

I highly doubt you've seen people not get punished because there are so many people available that you are likely never going to play against the same person twice and remember. Unless you keep a running list of everyone you play against, of course.

Did you just compare Riot to Hitler.

Did you just attempt to equate your extremely minor plight to one of the worst moments in history that caused the extermination of millions?

Middle Pantheon, reviewing chat boards is far less time consuming than reviewing games.

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20153 votes

{quoted}

The system isn't designed to hit intentional feeders immediately after the game. If the person did this in your game and you reported it, it'll probably take some time. Yes, that person will continue to flail around and possibly make some games worse, but given the volume of players and the fact they'd rather be sure than hand out bad punishments, it's reasonable.

I highly doubt you've seen people not get punished because there are so many people available that you are likely never going to play against the same person twice and remember. Unless you keep a running list of everyone you play against, of course.

Did you just compare Riot to Hitler.

Did you just attempt to equate your extremely minor plight to one of the worst moments in history that caused the extermination of millions?

Middle Pantheon, reviewing chat boards is far less time consuming than reviewing games.

Reading this thread is far more effort and time than peeking at a specific players match history and noticing they built more tears then they have games played.

OldDirtayOct 31, 20153 votes

{quoted}

The system isn't designed to hit intentional feeders immediately after the game. If the person did this in your game and you reported it, it'll probably take some time. Yes, that person will continue to flail around and possibly make some games worse, but given the volume of players and the fact they'd rather be sure than hand out bad punishments, it's reasonable.

I highly doubt you've seen people not get punished because there are so many people available that you are likely never going to play against the same person twice and remember. Unless you keep a running list of everyone you play against, of course.

Did you just compare Riot to Hitler.

Did you just attempt to equate your extremely minor plight to one of the worst moments in history that caused the extermination of millions?

Middle Pantheon, reviewing chat boards is far less time consuming than reviewing games.

dude, legit almost 50% in his history is him building only tears...not just in last 20 games...peek down and load more he does this more often than not

and thats one of the points of the thread, it shouldnt take hundreds of games to "catch up"

i did compare riot to hitler, and i said nothing about extermination of millions i pointed to the fact of what he says goes regardless if its right or wrong...by that logic id be saying they all have a hitler stash...again u took it out of context

and i have, to assume i havent is just that...an assumption

but at the same time with the same token, your not gonna piss on my leg and tell me its raining if i see it happening

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20153 votes

Also if any player talks about a game they had which they had a poor experience, anyone can look them up review their match history to look for an oddity and who was in the game and easily determine the name anyways using your games as the means, isn't saying not to mention them by name kinda redundant since Riot provides us the name anyways? I realize your just doing what you are supposed to but it does not mean the system isn't flawed.

OldDirtayOct 31, 20153 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2015-10-31T06:36:31.156+0000)

Also if any player talks about a game they had which they had a poor experience, anyone can look them up review their match history to look for an oddity and who was in the game and easily determine the name anyways using your games as the means, isn't saying not to mention them by name kinda redundant since Riot provides us the name anyways? I realize your just doing what you are supposed to but it does not mean the system isn't flawed.

the point of naming and shaming is to not undermine someone or flame them...in which case im not saying he was a bad player...he could be good for all i know, he was just not playing and intentionally feeding

on the same note, i didnt flame him and call him an asshole or something.....but to remove it and call it naming and shaming because i said his summoner name is a bit of a strech, thats like saying i cant mention your name ever regardless if good or bad.....i merely pointed out his history of going 0/10+ and building all tears

thats not saying he is bad, or an asshole etc, thats saying he is intentionally feeding and breaking the rules

but its just one more tool they use to keep forums like these from becoming public because then it gets to a matter of is he telling the truth or not while you cant provide evidence like a match history because somehow thats "naming and shaming"

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20152 votes

The player in question obviously knows how to build proper and has several games with reasonable items with reasonable scores but like half are all tears and so many deaths. If you were to look up the original poster I assure you it would not be hard to determine the game he had that was problematic and to identify who was causing the problem. If you search their name in your client you can see they do this over and over and over again. Only 2 things make sense, either it isn't a violation of a rule to play poorly on purpose and throw super hard, or Riot does not care enough to enforce it , you decide for yourself.

JubbinautOct 31, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Middle Pantheon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000e,timestamp=2015-10-31T07:05:58.210+0000)

Only 2 things make sense, either it isn't a violation of a rule to play poorly on purpose and throw super hard, or Riot does not care enough to enforce it , you decide for yourself.

This is a false dichotomy. There's also the possibility that he simply hasn't been picked up yet by the system.

Clown ApocalypseOct 31, 20151 votes

Any system that can't figure out that there are only two items that build out of tears and you don't need 5 is a shitty system. After he did it the first time he should have gotten a message informing him that was trolling. After the second time they should have been banned or at the very least rank restricted. This shit isn't new. People have been doing this since season 1 and never get punished for it until they have ruined so many games it's unreal. There was a forum post like 2 months ago about a guys who intentionally fed all the way down to b5 from platinum. He had to not only intentionally feed in over 100 games, but then make a board post about it going into great detail about the how and why of what he was doing. Then they finally banned him. After he ruined 100+ games between plat and bronze. So I guess this veigar we speak of has a good 350 or so more tears to build and a couple board posts confessing to his sins before he ever see's any action. Meanwhile anyone who mentions his name gets a stern rebuke from moderators almost immediately. Am I the only one seeing the irony in all of this?

Forever PantheonOct 31, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Catch A Fade,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000e00000000,timestamp=2015-10-31T14:34:25.540+0000)

Any system that can't figure out that there are only two items that build out of tears and you don't need 5 is a shitty system. After he did it the first time he should have gotten a message informing him that was trolling. After the second time they should have been banned or at the very least rank restricted. This shit isn't new. People have been doing this since season 1 and never get punished for it until they have ruined so many games it's unreal. There was a forum post like 2 months ago about a guys who intentionally fed all the way down to b5 from platinum. He had to not only intentionally feed in over 100 games, but then make a board post about it going into great detail about the how and why of what he was doing. Then they finally banned him. After he ruined 100+ games between plat and bronze. So I guess this veigar we speak of has a good 350 or so more tears to build and a couple board posts confessing to his sins before he ever see's any action. Meanwhile anyone who mentions his name gets a stern rebuke from moderators almost immediately. Am I the only one seeing the irony in all of this?

BRAVO!

Clown ApocalypseOct 31, 20151 votes

He can downvote it all he likes. Players like him are the problem. Riots system is always right in their eyes, until they end up on the shitty end of the stick. If that veigar would have been in one of their games and bought 5 tears and trolled they would have been pissed and reported them. Yet somehow he thinks we are wrong for thinking you shouldn't be able to do it 30 times and not get banned. He just wants somebody to argue with, and that's how most people on these boards are. They hop on your thread and spew a bunch of generalizations that have nothing to do with the specific instance you are talking about, then try to spin the conversation around and make it somehow seem like YOU are more of a problem than the person you are complaining about. Any facts you give are blown off as just your imagination. You aren't allowed to link to the person who trolled you's match history. So you get stuck having circular arguments with people like Jubbi, who will sit in your post all day and make it a point to downvote and downplay anything you have to say, while never saying anything meaningful. " He's gonna get his eventually " isn't very consoling when you realize he's done it at least 30 times before and gotten away with it. Reasonably you can expect them to get away with it the 31st time as well.

JubbinautOct 31, 20153 votes

[{quoted}](name=Catch A Fade,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000e0000000000000000,timestamp=2015-10-31T16:00:51.438+0000)

He can downvote it all he likes.

I haven't downvoted anything in this thread.

Players like him are the problem. Riots system is always right in their eyes, until they end up on the shitty end of the stick. If that veigar would have been in one of their games and bought 5 tears and trolled they would have been pissed and reported them. Yet somehow he thinks we are wrong for thinking you shouldn't be able to do it 30 times and not get banned.

I've explicitly stated - repeatedly - that that shouldn't be allowed.

I've explicitly stated - repeatedly - that it's an obvious limitation of the system that needs attention and work.

In other words, I AGREE that 30 games of intentional feeding is 29 games too many before the system picks them up.

I just don't think that that single limitation means that the system itself is inherently broken and irredeemable, which is the only point I've tried to make.

Clown ApocalypseOct 31, 20151 votes

Just seems like you've been pretty argumentative and doing lot of typing to agree, with your only difference of opinion being a fairly mundane point. You shouldn't be able to be reported 30 times for something that anybody with working vision can prove was a valid report. If you managed to do it 30 times and not get caught even though I'm sure people report you.....the system doesn't work. If it doesn't work its broken. Irredeemable? No. They supposedly have algorithms that can tell if you have someone on your account boosting even if it's a friend at your house or playing from somewhere you normally play. It's not hard to make an algorithm that understands when you buy multiple useless items in a game and were reported by your whole team for trolling. Once flagged it's not hard for that same algorithm to notice when you repeat these behaviors. And since you weren't the one who downvoted, then my comments were directed at whomever did and was cowardly enough to not state their position. My bad for assuming.

I've been paired with smurfs who were intentionally losing games either because they didn't get a lane they wanted, or were in or around promos and not trying to climb. You look at their history and see a bajillion games where they carried hard. Then you see the losses where they built 5 tears, 3 sets of boots, ap on ad characters, ad on ap characters, etc etc. Like they just started playing the game yesterday. Then you extend their history and see they've been doing this all season, they treat their smurf like a glorified bot game and either carry hard or force the team into a loss depending on their mood. These are the things an algorithm should be able to pick up on and really shouldn't be too hard to catch when people actually report you for it. The algorithm should also be able to figure out your main account and apply the penalties there, where it will hurt you the most. If you troll build in a game and it works out no harm no foul right? But if you buy a bunch of useless items then go 0-20 and get reported by your whole team.....you should get a warning the first time and rank restricted the second, and banned the third. 30 times should be enough to get you permabanned.

Rather than the people Riot appointed to moderate the boards bringing this to the attention of someone who can handle it, they immediately hop on his thread and edit his posts as if the stats on na.op.gg aren't public AND PROVIDED BY RIOT. Because naming and shaming someone who is purposely ruining games is a bad thing? He's not calling out some guy who had a bad game or 5 and talking about how bad he is. He's bringing the attention of the community to a problem and providing evidence which is his own match history. Anyone with a brain would click the veigar's name and look at his other games after seeing 5 tears that game. He shamed himself, all the OP did was name him.

JubbinautOct 31, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Catch A Fade,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=000e000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-10-31T17:04:23.887+0000)

Just seems like you've been pretty argumentative and doing lot of typing to agree, with your only difference of opinion being a fairly mundane point. You shouldn't be able to be reported 30 times for something that anybody with working vision can prove was a valid report. If you managed to do it 30 times and not get caught even though I'm sure people report you.....the system doesn't work. If it doesn't work its broken. Irredeemable? No.

I agree with many of his premises. I disagree with his conclusion - namely, that the whole thing's a wash and we should just start over.

Most of my argumentation, however, has been focused on trying to indicate that his arguments don't support his claim - and therefore don't support his conclusion. Because those arguments are inherently logically flawed, and littered with fallacies.

They supposedly have algorithms that can tell if you have someone on your account boosting even if it's a friend at your house or playing from somewhere you normally play.

There's no algorithm for that, to the best of my knowledge. That's all handled by manual reviews.

It's not hard to make an algorithm that understands when you buy multiple useless items in a game and were reported by your whole team for trolling. Once flagged it's not hard for that same algorithm to notice when you repeat these behaviors.

That's what the intentional Feeder subsystem does. It's just way under-tuned right now, because they're trying to be sure it functions properly before turning it up.

Rather than the people Riot appointed to moderate the boards bringing this to the attention of someone who can handle it, they immediately hop on his thread and edit his posts as if the stats on na.op.gg aren't public AND PROVIDED BY RIOT. Because naming and shaming someone who is purposely ruining games is a bad thing? He's not calling out some guy who had a bad game or 5 and talking about how bad he is. He's bringing the attention of the community to a problem and providing evidence which is his own match history. Anyone with a brain would click the veigar's name and look at his other games after seeing 5 tears that game. He shamed himself, all the OP did was name him.

That doesn't change the universal rules. And the third-party moderator's actions regarding that particular rule breach doesn't really speak to any other actions they may or may not have taken. It seems a silly assumption to claim that because the mod addressed someone breaking a board rule, he didn't also forward the case on to Support staff - because they're not mutually exclusive.

That said, I can't say that he did so, either - I honestly don't know. But I do know that putting this case in front of Support would - and would have been - a lot more effective than name-dropping the dude to a bunch of people who, frankly, have no real ability to do anything about it.

EvilDustManOct 31, 20152 votes

All that said, it is true that sometimes something on the boards leads to a ban as something is brought into light.

But if I posted screenshots of a guy stealing at work from a security camera, he wouldn't get fired on the spot by the assistant managers. They'd contact the manager and he'd go through the appropriate channels.

So let's say they have someone dedicated to skimming the board for reports of problems. They would flag the account and send it over to Behavior so they can dole out punishment. About the same as a report. But you would have a person telling you 'hey, we are looking into it'.

That's really what it boils down to. People don't trust the automated system. It works, but they don't like that they don't know right away it's being dealt with and they are vindicated. And people just gotta get over that.

AJStarhikerOct 31, 20152 votes

If you want to look someone up knock yourself out. But plastering their name all over the boards sets up a witch-hunt scenario.

As far as the number of games he's done this... if no one reported him (i.e. thinking it does nothing, so why bother) of course he isn't going to get caught.

Bringing up "Hey, we need a better system for picking up intentional feeding and troll builds" hey, that's cool. I agree fully to that. But there's no reason to call out individual players. Mob mentality-- especially over the internet with the perception of anonymity-- can turn nasty fast.

Here's another thought: How do you know they aren't looking for attention? What do you think naming them in the boards does? That's right, gives them attention. Instead of a flash in the pan and quickly forgotten, he gets attention and notoriety. Ignoring them and reporting as necessary takes whatever power they think they have away from them.

SuperJediNinjaNov 1, 20152 votes

Why all the down votes?

Android CowboyNov 1, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Why all the down votes?

In germany, they call the fanbois' downvoting practice, "slobben ze knobben". Gnar

OldDirtayOct 31, 20151 votes

its not a backhanded insult, if you dont get it then you dont get it...its legit that simple

its not that ur approaching it from a radically different perspective, your just not understanding what im saying more than half the time and it takes me time and page space to sit and answer every halfwitted illogical "argument" you come up with

it holds no value, hence why i asked u to stop and leave like 4 comments ago.....pantheon got it, you just didnt lol

i understand you like riot and you think the system is in a good place, but its not...and if i tell you facts on how its not you conclusion comes to well its not perfect but its there so its not broken...which is wrong lol even a broken clock is right twice a day

but again im not gonna hold your hand through a simple conversation because again...you dont get it

trust me if i wanted to insult you i would, and i didnt refuse to explain until 2 comments ago when i got tired of HAVING TO EXPLAIN it to you....are you getting it now? everyone seemed to except you

you...just...dont...get...it....please...leave....thanks....

JubbinautOct 31, 20152 votes

{quoted}

its not that ur approaching it from a radically different perspective, your just not understanding what im saying more than half the time and it takes me time and page space to sit and answer every halfwitted illogical "argument" you come up with

So because I don't subscribe to your fallacious arguments, I'm illogical? Sorry, I don't think that flies.

Your anecdotal argument is premised on a gambler's fallacy (he's never been punished before, so he'll never be punished in the future), supported by a texas sharpshooter fallacy (look at this data that supports my claims) and a composition fallacy (I didn't see any punishments in the limited data set I selected, so there can't have ever been any), and presents a black-or-white fallacy (also known as a false dichotomy).

I'm sorry, but I don't think pointing out the invalidity of these arguments can really be said to be illogical, since logically speaking, fallacies are inherently invalid.

That doesn't mean your argument is wrong - which is why I've agreed with you, to an extent. But it's certainly illogical.

i understand you like riot and you think the system is in a good place, but its not...and if i tell you facts on how its not you conclusion comes to well its not perfect but its there so its not broken...which is wrong lol even a broken clock is right twice a day

I've repeatedly said that it needs work - that it doesn't handle this situation well, and that needs to be addressed.

So where exactly did I say that I think it's in a good place? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I simply said that there's a difference between "needs improvement" and "broken."

trust me if i wanted to insult you i would, and i didnt refuse to explain until 2 comments ago when i got tired of HAVING TO EXPLAIN it to you....are you getting it now? everyone seemed to except you

You made exactly one comment to me before telling me: "then u dont belong here." But you just stick with that "2 comments" story. We both know better.

Oh, also, saying the same things over and over the same way? That's not explaining. Nor is it useful whatsoever.

Clown ApocalypseOct 31, 20151 votes

Who cares if he gets punished in the future after ruining 30 more games? He should be punished NOW. He should have been punished a long time ago. Their system is shit. The fact that he was even able to do this in more than one game without being punished is why the system is a joke. Yet if someone told him to go jump off a bridge for doing it they'd be banned. With a swiftness I might add.

JubbinautOct 31, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Catch A Fade,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=hN0yZ962,comment-id=001500000000,timestamp=2015-10-31T14:23:22.987+0000)

Who cares if he gets punished in the future after ruining 30 more games? He should be punished NOW. He should have been punished a long time ago. Their system is shit. The fact that he was even able to do this in more than one game without being punished is why the system is a joke. Yet if someone told him to go jump off a bridge for doing it they'd be banned. With a swiftness I might add.

The system is more tuned to handle verbal behaviors than non-verbal at the moment. There's two reasons for this.

The first is that verbal behaviors are extremely easy to detect - developing a system to address them was a comparatively simple matter.

The second is that verbal behaviors affect a significantly greater number of players (since it's a rather more common behavior overall) - and most of the players Riot has polled have indicated that it's the type of toxicity that is of greatest concern to them.

Non-verbal toxicity shouldn't be ignored, and I agree that it definitely needs to be handled better than it is - and they're working on that. But I have a hard time faulting Riot for trying to handle what their data suggests is the most commonly experienced (and most thoroughly disliked) behavior first.

Clown ApocalypseOct 31, 20151 votes

It's only the most common disliked behavior because people refuse to use the best option available to them which is the mute button. Also I don't believe they surveyed even a fraction of players so that's a bit of an assumption. They never asked me. I hate trolls way more than ragers. There is no option available to deal with someone trolling you except to continue to be trolled and report at the end of the game. Which is the entire premise of what I am saying. If they can detect when you are scripting and using programs, can detect when you are being boosted, then making an algorithm that says if you build more than 2 tears, and do horribly, and get reported by your whole team, its trolling . There are only 2 items that use it and the passives don't stack. You should get a warning after the first time telling you that's not wtf you do and that building like that and going 0-20 is considered toxic gameplay. They put entirely too much emphasis on what people are saying and not enough on what people are doing. I'd be willing to part with chat altogether and only communicate with pings if that meant they would finally buckle down and address people intentionally ruining games. It would also end ALL verbal toxicity.