Boards›Player Behavior

Tribunal is a flawed system

Duskz101·7/6/2018, 8:44:25 AM·1 votes·1,393 views

Well, that's my opinion. I think a system that relies on the common massive to make non-biased decisions like a judge is akin to the witch-huntings days. Yea, I'm sure that they are capable of making food decisions on punishments at times, but I also feel that they are much more likely to disregard context and ban purely on their own past experiences; which, can be quite flawed.

Also, the 'type' of person that heads to an online "court"-room to "dish out vengeance" is staggering. I think (another opinion) that the number of individuals looking to actually improve the community without unnecessary punishment is very small compared to those looking to exact what they consider judgment. Undoubtedly, there are a lot of toxic people in League of Legends, but I just don't think laying such a powerful tool in the communities hands does anything but worsen the situation.

Anyhow, the only suggestion I'd have to replace this system is to have paid employees reviewing games.

For such a MASSIVE company (reporting 65 million unique log-ins through a week, that's what Riot reports) I don't think this is an outrageous thing to expect
Even Heroes of the Storm (by Blizzard) has this system. It's not impractical.

To clarify, I don't have many issues with MOBAs and keeping a cool, so this doesn't really concern me, but a friend and I were talking about this and it really seems abnormal for a company such as Riot to do this... are there other companies that do this?

What do you guys think?

7 Comments

Voldymort7/6/2018, 8:53:47 AM10 votes

the tribunal hasn't been a thing in years. do your research before coming up with an opinion about how you think the system works, in the future

[slayer-jinx-catface]

For such a MASSIVE company (reporting 65 million unique log-ins through a week, that's what Riot reports) I don't think this is an outrageous thing to expect

question: exactly how many people do you think it would take to manually review 65 million reports per hour?

ModPeriscope7/6/2018, 9:04:49 AM3 votes

One of the primary reasons the tribunal was retired was because it got so back logged. Players would exhibit toxic behavior, then be punished for it far after it had happened. This would often subject players unnecessarily to toxicity, since toxic players could continue to play. It’s now done by an automated system, which learned from the tribunal as well as continuously through reports, the boards, and other inputs.

Did you have an unreasonable punishment? I’d suggest posting your logs, or submitting a support ticket if you’d rather just speak to a rioter about your logs.

TrulyBland7/6/2018, 9:06:06 AM1 votes

Even though Tribunal has been discontinued for quite a while, I'd like to point out a key difference between Tribunal and angry mobs: Independency. It's been quite a while since I've heard this in a scientific context, so I can't point you towards the specific studies, but generally the reason why mobs are so dangerous is the social interaction of members of the mobs. People desiring to appear a certain way, people trying to appeal to people whose opinion they value more than others, etc.

When votes are completely independent from one another, on the other hand, you get an effect called wisdom of the crowd, with the extremes to both sides being lost in the average. Basically, since Tribunal voters were unable to communicate with one another, and since the votes were 100% anonymous, they likely reflected the actual opinion of the community regarding toxicity fairly accurately.

Edit: Regarding the "such a massive company"-argument, Riot is actually still pretty damn small given the amount of players LoL has. Didn't check the numbers in a while, but if nothing changed much HotS has less players than LoL, with Blizzard being a way larger company than Riot. And to my knowledge even Blizzard has started using automated systems because they struggled to dish out required punishments manually in a timely fashion.

Kei1437/6/2018, 2:08:41 PM1 votes

{quoted}

Well, that's my opinion. I think a system that relies on the common massive to make non-biased decisions like a judge is akin to the witch-huntings days. Yea, I'm sure that they are capable of making food decisions on punishments at times, but I also feel that they are much more likely to disregard context and ban purely on their own past experiences; which, can be quite flawed.

Also, the 'type' of person that heads to an online "court"-room to "dish out vengeance" is staggering. I think (another opinion) that the number of individuals looking to actually improve the community without unnecessary punishment is very small compared to those looking to exact what they consider judgment. Undoubtedly, there are a lot of toxic people in League of Legends, but I just don't think laying such a powerful tool in the communities hands does anything but worsen the situation.

These are one of the few reasons why the IFS replaced the tribunal.

Silent Gravity7/6/2018, 6:53:12 PM1 votes

If Riot purpose built a facility for reviewing reports and hired low-wage workers to staff it, by my estimation it would still cost about $20 for every single report they reviewed.

Math here. (The post is about Riot reviewing the actions of Player Moderators, but the math is the same as if Riot was directly reviewing the reported games, so the flavor text around the numbers doesn't apply to this discussion, but the math applies.)

Kaioko7/6/2018, 7:02:52 PM1 votes

Tribunal doesn't exist your information is out of date by about 4 years.