Boards›Player Behavior

Must be nice to never be wrong.

mlm olo mlm··3 votes·3,951 views

(Reserved for screenshot)

Seeing as we're already on the subject, this is from our Terms of Use:

"Transmitting or communicating any content which, in the sole and exclusive discretion of Riot Games, is deemed offensive..."

The situation is a little more complex than some might imagine.

including language that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, or racially, ethically, or otherwise objectionable;

That is the last line of the Terms of Use.

I ask you, what is left to punish? Literally, what offenses are not listed there already?

This is a clear example of how Riot is punishing players "because they can".

Riot is not a benevolent company. They are full of malicious people.

The "golden rule" is treat people how you want to be treated. Well, how does Riot treat some people?

They spend years designing programs to automatically identify and punish people. They will tell them straight to their face to leave the game and never come back. They will permanently ban law-abiding accounts. They will call them all sorts of insults.

Hypocritical, self-righteous, and malicious. Those are Riots defining characteristics.

May this post serve as a reminder to the public. When it comes to League of Legends, Riot is unquestionable. Don't ask the community about specific punishments. Ask Riot, the only opinion that matters.

64 Comments

Sona Ping12 votes

You... clearly, do not understand legal language.

DBS Ronovon1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Sona Ping,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kXu1xOZ4,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-05-24T20:01:30.572+0000)

You... clearly, do not understand legal language.

Why are you insulting people on the boards?

Sona Ping1 votes

[{quoted}](name=DBS Ronovon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kXu1xOZ4,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2018-05-31T19:06:09.675+0000)

Why are you insulting people on the boards?

That is not an insult. Nor would telling you that you are wrong about something being an insult be an insult. Ironically, making unwarranted accusations about others and their character...

I wrote a statement to convey that mlm olo mlm (NA) is taking an example of language that would be found to be pretty normal in any ToS and is trying to wrongly construe that as both a confession and statement of malicious intent by Riot towards their userbase. I wrote that the idea is incorrect and unfounded to the degree it must be due to his lack of understanding of the subject at hand.

In actuality, I wrote that with the conclusion that is more generous towards his character. But you are trying to portray that as an insult.

DBS Ronovon1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Sona Ping,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kXu1xOZ4,comment-id=000100010000,timestamp=2018-06-01T01:21:05.929+0000)

That is not an insult. Nor would telling you that you are wrong about something being an insult be an insult. Ironically, making unwarranted accusations about others and their character...

I wrote a statement to convey that mlm olo mlm (NA) is taking an example of language that would be found to be pretty normal in any ToS and is trying to wrongly construe that as both a confession and statement of malicious intent by Riot towards their userbase. I wrote that the idea is incorrect and unfounded to the degree it must be due to his lack of understanding of the subject at hand.

In actuality, I wrote that with the conclusion that is more generous towards his character. But you are trying to portray that as an insult.

No, you insulted my intelligence, said I couldn’t read or comprehend words. You passively called me retarded without saying that exact word, and that is an insult.

Deep Terror Nami11 votes

It's worded to be vague and broad so that it's difficult to impossible for players to be huge problems and avoid punishment because it's "technically not against the rules". They don't seek ways to punish you for no reason; if they have to invoke vague and broad rules, which they will almost never do, it's for a very good reason.

AeroWaffle5 votes

Riot covers all the bases because there are certainly malicious people who would use a loophole to be an asshole then they would bitch about a ban claiming, "Technically I didn't break the rules". There are plenty of people out there that think, so long as they don't break the letter of the rule, that it's fine breaking the spirit of the rule.

Let me put it simply to you. It's in Riot's best interest to not ban for frivolous reasons because they actually want customers. But the fact of the matter is there will always be people who think their behavior was fine no matter how much you try to explain to them they were out of line.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

malicious people who would use a loophole to be an asshole

Example of the Riot hypocrite club.

AeroWaffle4 votes

If you actually defend your point instead of insulting people you'll find that you have a better chance of making a valid argument.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

hy·poc·ri·sy - the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform

You claim I insulted you and that is wrong. Yet, you insult people all the time.

malicious people who would use a loophole to be an asshole

I think you are lost. There is no argument. Riot has SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE DISCRETION. You don't get to argue with SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE DISCRETION.

AeroWaffle3 votes

How am I being a hypocrite? Are you attempting to argue that I am using a loophole to be an asshole? If so, where? Where am I being an asshole?

Meanwhile this,

Example of the Riot hypocrite club.

Is most certainly an insult.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

You honestly think "asshole" is not an insult and "hypocrite" is?

AeroWaffle3 votes

I don't remember calling you or or anyone else an asshole. I said that they would intentionally subvert the rules to be an asshole, as in that was their intent.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

I said that they would intentionally subvert the rules

Not an insult.

to be an asshole

Insult.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/asshole

usually vulgar : a stupid, annoying, or detestable person

Notice the differences between the definitions of "hypocrisy" and "asshole"?

AeroWaffle2 votes

Or just ignore my post, that's fine too.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

Ignore your post by quoting it?

I promise you it is ok to be wrong. That is how you learn. Unless you aren't interested in learning. Maybe you are going for a job at Riot where you will have that sweet sole and exclusive discretion. No more "bad" people disagreeing with you.

AeroWaffle6 votes

You quoted me, but you ignored the point. So yeah, you ignored the post. And you continue to follow up with more insults.

So have fun, you're not here for any sort of rational discourse.

Kei1435 votes

Your claims will be true if they actually punish "unlawful" account.

Which .. they don't.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

Sorry, but you make no sense.

My claims are true. Scroll down to the bottom of this website and click "Terms of Use". Have a read and point out which part I got wrong.

What is "unlawful account"? Are you trying to make a joke that Riot doesn't ban bots?

Kei1433 votes

Oops. I meant lawful account.

[slayer-jinx-catface]

mlm olo mlm1 votes

The hell they don't.

https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/ZkZWEUYE-banned-for-intentionally-feeding-but-it-was-just-a-hard-game

Riot punished a "lawful" account. Realized later that they punished a "lawful" account. Then removed the remaining punishment. No reparations were given.

VorpalKitsune6 votes

Then when they are made aware that a mistake was made, the unban them then, like in that case. So not a real good point.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

You missed the no reparations part. TBH I was waiting for an opportunity to use this analogy.

Imagine you are sitting peacefully in your home. One day, the police come in and arrest you. You spend 2 full days in jail. The police then release you. The police say, "Sorry, we got the wrong giuy."

In this analogy, you did nothing wrong. However, you still had to sit in jail for 2 full days. On top of that, the police didn't offer payment for your lost time.

DrCyanide2 votes

Your analogy is crap. In jail you can't do anything, while being banned from League just means you can't log in on that account. It doesn't even mean you can't play League in that time (provided you have a different account)!

mlm olo mlm1 votes

So my analogy is crap because jail is a harsher punishment than account bans? You didn't even understand the point. It's not about severity of punishment, it's about existence of punishment.

BladeSteel1 votes

They wouldn't offer payment for your lost time in real life either...

Imperial Pandaa1 votes

They are probably referring to lawsuits involving wrongful arrests. Which at that point it really becomes a matter of how the arrest came about.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

In real life, we can sue for reparations.

Also, in real life, at least for my country, people are assumed innocent until proven guilty. Whereas Riot assumes we are guilty until proven innocent.

Let's go back to the start of this discussion though. Riot has punished "lawful" accounts before. Whether Riot catches/corrects their mistakes does not matter. The fact of the matter is, Riot has issued punishment towards lawful accounts.

TrulyBland3 votes

In real life, we can sue for reparations.

The thing about reparations is pretty much irrelevant. When you are arrested in real life you are being strongly inconvenienced because something that you are entitled to (your freedom) is taken away from you without reason. But Riot is not offering you a stabile service that you can subscribe to. You are not entitled to them providing their service to you.

It obviously sucks if you get wrongly punished by Riot and, thus, are unable to play the game until they have confirmed the mistake. But it's not really different in any meaningful way from, say, having a very particular technical problem that only affects you.

Whereas Riot assumes we are guilty until proven innocent.

Sorry but this statement is just straight up bullshit. If that were the case, then literally all of us would be permabanned until we prove to Riot that we didn't do anything wrong. If the mere existence of false punishments implied that there was a presumption of guilt, then the same would apply to literally every single country in the world, because false punishments exist fucking everywhere.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

It obviously sucks if you get wrongly punished by Riot and, thus, are unable to play the game until they have confirmed the mistake. But it's not really different in any meaningful way from, say, having a very particular technical problem that only affects you.

There is a very meaningful difference. Technical bugs are not manually and individually distributed. AKA the difference between getting caught in the rain and someone throwing a bucket of water on you.

If that were the case, then literally all of us would be permabanned until we prove to Riot that we didn't do anything wrong.

No. It means Riot administers punishment before trial. Burden of proof is the players responsibility.

If the mere existence of false punishments implied that there was a presumption of guilt, then the same would apply to literally every single country in the world, because false punishments exist fucking everywhere.

Do you go around punishing innocent people? I imagine not. You punish people that you PRESUME are guilty.

TrulyBland2 votes

No. It means Riot administers punishment before trial.

"Trial" and "Proof" are different concepts. If you want to complain you didn't get a "proper" trial, do so. Riot still doesn't punish people without first proving (by their own standards) that they are guilty.

Burden of proof is the players responsibility.

No. That is simply not true. I am not banned. I never proved to Riot that I am innocent. That right there disproves your point.

The burden of proof isn't even on those who have been punished (which would even make sense to some degree), because those people simply ask for Riot to rexamine the situation. They do not supply proof because they can't supply proof given that everything is on Riot's server.

Do you go around punishing innocent people? I imagine not. You punish people that you PRESUME are guilty.

What are you even trying to say with that? The point is not presuming to begin with, because innocent and presumed guilty are not mutually exclusive.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

Riot still doesn't punish people without first proving (by their own standards) that they are guilty.

Automated system though. Punishments happen automatically. Riot assumes the automated system will make no mistakes. Then it gets proven to make mistakes.

The thing is, Riot automatically proves "guilt" every time. The IFS can't "lie". However, there have been cases where Riot has mistakenly punished someone. In those cases, Riot "assumed" guilt, and was proven wrong. After all, you can't prove an innocent person guilty.

They do not supply proof because they can't supply proof given that everything is on Riot's server.

Collaborating evidence can be a form of proof. (Providing account details for hacked account recovery.)

I probably used wrong words anyways. The main idea is that the players have to start an investigation after they were already punished.

If the mere existence of false punishments implied that there was a presumption of guilt Do you go around punishing innocent people? I imagine not. You punish people that you PRESUME are guilty.

False punishments can not happen if the system proves them guilty. False punishments can happen if the system presumes them guilty.

Whereas Riot assumes we are guilty until proven innocent.

That refers to punished players. You applied it to every account. I could have worded better. Sorry.

TrulyBland2 votes

[{quoted}](name=mlm olo mlm,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kXu1xOZ4,comment-id=000300000000000000000000000100010000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-28T01:58:39.672+0000)

The thing is, Riot automatically proves "guilt" every time.

What is that supposed to mean? It clearly doesn't prove guilt "every time" because otherwise everybody who is ever reported (or reported enough) would automatically be punished.

The IFS can't "lie". However, there have been cases where Riot has mistakenly punished someone. In those cases, Riot "assumed" guilt, and was proven wrong. After all, you can't prove an innocent person guilty.

Anywhere outside of mathematics proof is based on a degree of confidence, not on infallible evidence. So yes, yes you can. That's the whole fucking problem. That's why innocents are in jail and that's why innocents get their accounts banned in LoL.

False punishments can not happen if the system proves them guilty. False punishments can happen if the system presumes them guilty.

By that logic, EVERY justice system ever in the history of justice systems presumes people's guilt. Or do you think there are no innocents in jails right now? It is also not a presumption if it's the result of evaluating evidence. That's the whole point of the presumption of innocence. Scientifically speaking, innocence is the null hypothesis. You then go and try to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the null hypothesis doesn't hold.

And here's the thing: This applies to punished players as well. The problem is that if a punished player wants their case to be reexamined by somebody manually, the result of the automated process will be held against the player. As such there is already evidence agains the player of the quality of DNA based evidence (high and known degree of confidence) which needs to be overcome to prove innocence.

But this is not a presumption; it's considering pre-existing evidence. And just like in RL the burden of proof may start on the party that tries to prove guilt, but is ultimately passed to whoever tries to dispute how conclusive the given evidence is.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

What is that supposed to mean? It clearly doesn't prove guilt "every time" because otherwise everybody who is ever reported (or reported enough) would automatically be punished.

It means Riot has sole and exclusive discretion. And as you mentioned, the IFS is considered accurate enough that it is allowed to automatically issue punishments. The result is punished players have no defense by default.

By that logic, EVERY justice system ever in the history of justice systems presumes people's guilt.

I think I should have said "assumed". Can it still be "presumed" if verdict is issued without reviewing all the evidence?

And just like in RL the burden of proof may start on the party that tries to prove guilt, but is ultimately passed to whoever tries to dispute how conclusive the given evidence is.

That is what annoys me about sole and exclusive discretion. Riot has no burden of proof. Riots word is gospel. If Riot says you are against Terms of Use, then you are against Terms of Use. No proof needed.

Since no proof is needed by Riot, the burden of proof is instantly shifted to the punished players.

This is where you say the players can't provide proof or evidence. However, players can provide proof and evidence. Riot still has sole and exclusive discretion though so it is up to Riot whether to even review the players testimony.

I think Riot acknowledges that IFS is not infallible. That is why they allow testimony from players. Let's not forget though, the players are giving testimony after already being punished and convicted. There is extreme bias against the accused in every single case.

BladeSteel1 votes

Go ahead and sue then, be my guest.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

Really? That is what you got out of all this talking?

Real life =/= Riot games

You forget the entire point of this thread. Riot has sole and exclusive discretion.

Riot is police. Riot is jury. Riot is judge. That is undeniable fact. Read the Terms of Use.

BladeSteel1 votes

Thats great. That is what all videogames are like, so what is your point?

mlm olo mlm1 votes

Why would I sue when I know I'm going to lose?

archerno12 votes

Its their game. Their property. They dont even need reason to remove someone from their property. Same applies to you. You too can remove anyone you want from your property. Riot isnt government. They dont have to prove anything to anyone.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

There is a difference. I never agreed to let you on my property. We never made a contract allowing you on my property. You never rented pieces of my property.

In my country, we don't personally "remove" people from our property. We call the police and they "remove" people from our property.

Imperial Pandaa3 votes

Maybe change that statement, because plenty of people have removed others from their property. Usually only resorting to cops it it seems like it is going to escalate.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

You don't even know which country I am from. Yet, you want to tell me, with authority, that you understand the laws and culture of my home better than I do.

Fuck off.

Imperial Pandaa2 votes

Maybe I don't know 100%, but you know what? You are posting from a god damn NA account. So working with the information I have, which is basically that, i gave my response. I also never claimed it was a law or anything like that.

Now, lets go ahead and go back a bit too since your argument was based that contracts are needed for "visitors". We have a tendency to sometimes invite friends over, this would be a verbal contract. Typically our invited guest know the rules we have. If at any point they break a rule or we no longer wish for the company, we may have them removed. Normally they respect our wishes and leave peacefully; rarely they may object and try to stay. If they try to stay, we may ask one or two more times. Failure of them doing so, we would contact legal assistance and most likely not invite them back. That is an example of a contract that we have for friends. We don't have to have a rental agreement to be able to remove people from our homes. Now, unless you have a "no trespassing" sign, it can be argued that there is an Unspoken Contract for a random person coming onto your property. This unspoken contract is not a long one, basically just permission to knock/ring a doorbell. At which point, a verbal contract might be made.

If you don't like my opinion on this, well, you probably shouldn't post on a public forum where anyone is welcome to weigh in. You are welcome to report my comment, but I am not obligated to "fuck off".

mlm olo mlm1 votes

since your argument was based that contracts are needed for "visitors".

NO. Fucking NO. I never argued that. Fuck off. All you do is lie.

Imperial Pandaa2 votes

[{quoted}](name=mlm olo mlm,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kXu1xOZ4,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2018-05-25T18:01:04.885+0000)

There is a difference. I never agreed to let you on my property. We never made a contract allowing you on my property. You never rented pieces of my property.

In my country, we don't personally "remove" people from our property. We call the police and they "remove" people from our property.

Not a lie. Interpretation.

People are either visitors or intruders. If you don't have a post "No Trespassing" sign, they are a visitor until you tell them to leave. Failure of them to leave, would make them a trespasser.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

Your personal property and Riot have different laws and culture. That is a fact. It is not up to your personal opinions on the matter.

Imperial Pandaa2 votes

Except they can be similar. If I let someone in my house for a party or whatever; if they start spewing hate speech, or causing trouble I am allowed to tell them to leave. Because I am not a government entity, I am not bound by freedom of speech.

The same is being said in this case for Riot. Riot doesn't want someone on there property and warns them. Then they remove them for x time, potentially permanently. They also aren't government and therefore are not restricted by free speech.

Now, Riot has there own guidelines they have to follow as a business. You may have noticed one of which recently. Since privacy policies have been updated, they are required to notify you of this.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

Except they can be similar.

Similar = Different

Your personal property and Riot have** different** laws and culture.

Edit: If they aren't different then they are the same. Similar is different from same. Words are fun.

Imperial Pandaa3 votes

Yes, similar means they resemble without being identical.

You don't contest the statement though. That Riot is able to punish what they want without breaking their own rules.

mlm olo mlm1 votes

You don't contest the statement though. That Riot is able to punish what they want without breaking their own rules.

I'm not trying to.

May this post serve as a reminder to the public.** When it comes to League of Legends, Riot is unquestionable**. Don't ask the community about specific punishments. Ask Riot, the only opinion that matters.

More of your lies that I can easily refute by quoting things already said.

Imperial Pandaa3 votes

And you remember what actually started this entire triad?

In my country, we don't personally "remove" people from our property. We call the police and they "remove" people from our property.

Because I pointed out that people have removed others from their property, legally, without the need of cops.

More from Player Behavior

The indefinite banning of Tyler1
Player Behavior4,799 comments
2,942
votes
14 day ban because playing Nunu Support with Smite is "stealing other people's roles"...?
Player Behavior1,525 comments
1,086
votes
Riot should add monthly status cards
Player Behavior241 comments
843
votes
Reminder that we haven't gotten our Summoner report cards yet :/
Player Behavior145 comments
619
votes
I'm not "triggered" by you throwing insults.
Player Behavior361 comments
548
votes
Black Alistar, King Rammus!!!!
Player Behavior462 comments
503
votes

More by mlm olo mlm

Why are you deleting the thread for reasons outside the authors control?
Discuss the Boards50 comments
7
votes
I want to compare league to a restaurant.
Gameplay20 comments
6
votes
Random idea: more chat restrictions for minor offenses instead of "leniency"
Player Behavior30 comments
6
votes
#metoo
Discuss the Boards13 comments
5
votes
You know you are getting high quality service when....
Discuss the Boards56 comments
5
votes
About player reform experiment
Player Behavior7 comments
5
votes