Boards›Player Behavior

Should perma-bans be issued to those who can't use chat responsibly? Discussion and Sugesstions.

Mobcat·12/6/2017, 1:29:02 AM·1 votes·528 views

There are certainly different degrees of toxicity in this game when it come to chat, from hate speech to giving up. It all boils down to being negative. You CAN be reported for simply being a negative factor in chat- what constitutes toxicity is chosen by the players with this automated system.

The bottom 5% of players in terms of toxicity get punished for their lack of responsibility with the chat system. At first hey lose their chat privileges. Bans follow subsequent infractions within a certain time frame.

The Automated System

The Post-Lyte system seems to give 2 warnings in the form of punishment (1 chat restrict; 1 2 week ban) before a permanent ban. These two "warnings" are not the most transparent in whats to come if behavior isn't improved. Instead of getting regular updates on one's behavior its simply expected that one should fear further punishment due to the previous punishments. We are given "data" stating how most people improve after these punishments.

This is similar to getting grounded by your dad, followed by a beating and then a murder with 0 verbal warnings for each offense. Instead dad tells you about how other kids respect their fathers. Extreme example. Sure. But you're still dead with 0 real warnings. Your "warning" is fear. There is no transparency as to when you're getting close to crossing the line. Just fear.

Is it fair or even ethical to permanently ban a player who has potentially spent >$1,000 and countless hours on their account? The only reason its justifiable to permaban an account is due to player's breaking the summoners code in which they agreed to abide by. But is it the right approach? Does this approach allow for reform?

Intentional Feeding/Cheating V.S. Verbal Toxicity

Intentionally feeding is an act that ruins the game for both teams. If the team opposing the intentional feeder wins they may just be glad they won, but was it a deserved win? They know it wasn't. Intentionally feeding, scripting, and any sort of cheating is the only way to truly skew the game's results.

It is obvious that tilt is a real factor in a game. Things happen. Things go wrong and the mindset of a player(s) goes down. Some players irresponsibly use the chat function of the game as an outlet for their tilt. It can potentially bring down other players. Thankfully there is a mute button. A very under-utilized mute button. Thankfully there is a report button. A very over-utilized report button.

There are multiple and common pregame messages stating how people should utilize the report feature and how being toxic loses one more games. Sadly there is ONE pregame message giving attention and power to the mute button. The mute button is hardly advocated but is very strong.

Reverse Causality of "Toxicity" and Winrate

There are stats given about how positive players win X% more amount of games in an effort to incentivize players to be positive. Winning is what we all want right? There are multiple issues with this. First, the problem is that the goal is to win. This is the root of toxicity. Players want to win. Players are passionate. It gets the best of many of us and sadly many resort to verbal toxicity- they abuse the chat feature.

Any statistician knows about reverse causality. Every statistician knows about how data can be presented in ways to get the idea they WANT across even if its not necessarily true. It makes sense that riot would state that players who are positive also win more games. It makes sense right? It gives players the right idea, right?

The issue is that losing a game is likely to create a negative environment on a team. If you are losing you are more likely to be negative. Because of this the data is skewed and cannot legitimately be presented the way it is. We all generally win ~50% of the time over a large sample of games against players of similar skill level.

The Potential of The Honor System in Regards to Measuring Player Behavior

Based on how it seems, the honor system is a very linear based system tied mostly to in-game rewards and benefits. It rewards positivity, but does it actually punish those who misbehave? As it stands, in order to LOSE honor you need to be issued an infraction. A chat restrict; A ban.

The current honor system is very linear and slowly goes up until you get punished. In which case you drop to 0. The honor system can potentially measure a player's behavior in a much more responsive and transparent way. It should feel everchanging and volatile based on your behavior in game. It currently feels like a linear progression rather than a representation of how you behave. If players are misbehaving one night, how is it unreasonable to lose an honor level in order to represent that with the chance to regain that level within a day (or x amount of games) of good behavior. What if punishments were handed out once a player reaches level 0 honor? And strong and clear warnings once level 1 is reached? Why do we punish people and instill fear without a system that has potential to paint a picture of how one's behavior is trending? The current system allows a player to gain honor levels while still being on such thin ice that 2-3 slip ups can permanently ban them. In these cases the honor system fails.

The honor system CAN be a player's report card. But its not. Its more like a reactive santa's naughty and nice list after punishment has been dealt.

The Possibility of Permanently Revoking Chat Rights

If a player is solely banned for their lack of responsibility in chat, why are we permanently banning their account? Can the problem not be fixed through revoking their chat rights indefinitely? If players are ruining games through intentionally feeding or cheating there is definitely reason to permanently ban. You simply can't have that in a game where the goal is to win.

I personally think if we are to ban players for chat abuse, then there should be programs to reform.

Reform Possibilities

If a player is permanently banned for chat abuse there should be reformation options available to the players.

personally I find the idea of EARNING your account back through good behavior to be intuitive. Many banned accounts have a lot of value in terms of dollars spent and time put into them. They have friendslists that have been accrued over YEARS. They have intrinsic and monetary value to the player who was banned. There is incentive to reform in the form of their old account that they had lost.

SUGGESTION/IDEA: Make a new account TIED to the banned account. This would be coordinated through player support tickets. Instantly place account in smurf queues and require the player to level the new account with good behavior. ONCE 30. Give players t he opportunity to EARN parts of their banned account through good behavior. DISABLE free loot that normal accounts benefit from. REPLACE with re-earned "loot" system. Don't give them too much at once. Don't reward them for simply hitting 30. Make it a grind. Skins. Champs. Icons. Friendslist. Summoner Name. These are examples of pieces of the account that may be earned back with good behavior. A player should be able to regain access to their account with consistent improvement in the form of starting anew and working their way up. All the stuff they would be earning was already owned on a banned account.

Make it harsh as well. Players who slip when reforming under this should not be rewarded. They should be given a chance though.

The incentive is there. The potential is there. We have players that WANT to improve, but we don't currently give incentive. Only fear.

12 Comments

pizzapants12/6/2017, 1:41:34 AM3 votes

I disagree. Giving them an opportunity to get their account back is just bad. First off, the system gives 3 warnings before a permaban. 10 game chat ban, 25 game chat ban, and a 2-week ban. These punishments should be enough to stop the toxic behavior. Why would Riot give another chance to someone who broke the rules and kept going until they got a permaban? Seems unreasonable and they should realize their mistakes before they get their permaban. If they choose to learn the hard way by getting banned all the way through, they should learn their lesson then. The banned account should be a reminder to never go back to their negative attitude.

Umbral Regent12/6/2017, 2:06:46 AM3 votes

So, first thing I want to point out real quick is that, you have the info on the punishment ladder just a teensy bit wrong.

(1 chat restrict; 1 2 week ban)

It's two chat restricts, then the temp ban. The punishment ladder goes: 10-Game Chat Restriction > 25-Game Chat Restriction > 14-Day Account Suspension > Permanent Account Suspension.

As for the answer to the question about fairness and ethics - I'd say yes. It's absolutely fair for people who ignore the rules and ruin games by spilling their toxicity into the chat and beleaguering their teams to be permanently banned. Sacrifice the few to benefit the many. I won't wholeheartedly agree that we have the perfect system, though - there are a few kinks in it, but I myself don't have any suggestions or good insight on them, so, I won't speak to that.

I will also agree (somewhat) about the mute feature being underutilized - I've seen too many people get bothered by someone, claim to mute them, and not actually go through with it. They just bicker and argue and bitch about when they should've had player B muted eighteen minutes ago.

But, I can't imagine that saying that "the report feature is overutilized" is a factual, or even logical statement. In comparison to the mute feature, sure, it could pretty well be monumentally overutilized, but with a punishment system that can detect and toss away false reports, I don't really think that it's hypothetically possible to overutilize it.

Now, this next part is going to need a line break, since...I'm probably gonna have a wall of text here. (Implying I don't already)

EDIT: Also wanted to say as a bit of an afterthought that, the whole honor section below between line breaks can probably easily be read as (and very slightly is) pretty aggravated in tone. Just to give a heads-up, I say everything below with respect to the OP - I'm attacking the arguments, not the people posing them. That all said, I also apologize for the aggravated tone. A whole lot of my feathers were ruffled by the Honor segment I discuss below.

So, about your thoughts on the Honor System; first and foremost, I think you have the wrong frame of mind about it, since your whole idea about it is for it to be as capricious and prone to changing as someone's general behavior patterns. While it is hypothetically ideal that the Honor System should better reflect a person's behavior, the Honor System shouldn't really be so intwined with a player's behavior that it could quite literally change overnight.

Like how some people view there isn't any clear indication behind a punishment from the reform cards, having the Honor System change because of one night of salt would leave a lot of players bewildered and curious, especially with how long it usually takes to go up an Honor Level. (albeit you did mention that you suggest Honor Levels should be quicker to obtain, but, there's problems with that, too.)

And, you also ask;

It rewards positivity, but does it actually punish those who misbehave?

But, here's the issue; it's not the Honor System's goal to punish misbehavior and rulebreaking, it's to reward sportsmanship and positivity. It only just intersects with the Punishment System in one location (punishments dropping you honor levels), but that's where its relevance to punishments ends.

To suggest that the Honor System should punish people who misbehave is to imply you want the systems with clear and intentional designs to reach out of their own spheres of design and into others - which is a very, very bad idea. The more one design intermingles with the realm of another design, the more muddied both become, and - in worst case scenarios - one system could be completely erased because the other has all its work integrated into it.

Further, there's this;

What if punishments were handed out once a player reaches level 0 honor? And strong and clear warnings once level 1 is reached?

No. There is no reason whatsoever that players should have 5-6~ EXTRA chances to ruin other player's experiences with their toxicity. The Honor System is not meant to safeguard players from punishments just because they've been nice for a while, it's there to reward long-term sportsmanship. If you want to improve the punishment system, focus on the punishment system - the only caveat I'd imagine is if you wanted to propose some sort of incentive for better behavior, in which you'd talk about the Punishment System and Honor System in roughly equal measure.

But, again; The Honor System should not ever be used as a safeguard against the punishment system. Ever.

The honor system CAN be a player's report card. But its not.

Because it isn't supposed to be. Read above; if you want to suggest "report cards" or ways for players to track their negative behavioral trends, that's something meant for the Punishment System, not the Honor System.

In regards to the entire segment about permanent chat bans/revoking chat privileges - I have some very simple thoughts on that matter.

If someone's ruining other player's games through verbal toxicity, giving them a permanent chat ban will not help them reform. It will only cause them to be toxic through other means.

If I'm irreconcilably, violently angry at someone for no good reason, and I start yelling at them - would silencing me do any good? I'd probably just start punching or kicking them. The same applies to League; if you permanently chat restrict someone who has a history of overbearing toxicity, they're more than likely going to just express their toxicity through trolling or intentional feeding. Nothing is learned.

And, for the last segment, your suggestions about reform, I'm only going to say that, personally, I'm against it. My reasons, I won't disclose since I'm not in the presence of mind to consider them right now (since I kinda spent a lot of focus and energy just tearing at the Honor segment), but the only thing that really needs to be said is "I'd say 'no'."

ModThe Djinn12/6/2017, 2:10:17 PM2 votes

personally I find the idea of EARNING your account back through good behavior to be intuitive.

Riot tried this with their Level 20 Challenge a few years ago, save with the added advantage that they personally hand-picked players who they thought had a good shot at reforming AND discussed their behavior with them (along with needed changes).

Most of them STILL failed.

The reason you can't earn stuff back is because Riot's official stance, after all their experiments and data, is "if you've been banned permanently, chances are high we don't ever want you playing this game or spending money on it again. Please find another community." Yes, there are always exceptions, and yes, some player come back as model community members. But those low numbers of success stories aren't worth encouraging all toxic players to come back on new accounts.

Xidphel12/6/2017, 2:43:01 AM1 votes

They are.