Boards›Player Behavior

Permaban via AI with no context = Immoral

SirAdamMcMittens·6/7/2018, 1:11:51 AM·1 votes·865 views

_TL;DR: The current reporting system is broken. Taking peoples money and permanently banning them under an extremely unjust and imperfect system is immensely immoral. I'm sure Riot thinks "we've created a strong enough positive feedback loop of addiction that they'll just make a new account and spend even more money." And that might work on some people, sure. But not me. This is wrong, and I'm done. _

DISCLAIMER: Yeah, this is another post about getting permabanned for what feels like unfair circumstances. Yeah, the majority of you on your high computer chair will simply respond "dont retaliate and you wont be banned." Great for you. I'm sure you've never made a mistake as the avatar of moral purity you so implicitly claim to be with such an obtuse statement. This post isn't for you. Kindly downvote this like the predictable type of person you are and move on. This is for reasonable people with an open enough mind to accept that sometimes people blow off steam in games. Sometimes, people want to stand up for themselves when others are being insufferably toxic to them.

I fully accept chat restrictions, temporary bans, etc. I think it's great that Riot makes an effort to reward honorable players. But let's be honest: they don't reward "honor" in chat, but rather the ability to carry a game to victory. That's who gets the honor in games. Permabanning a person, especially by way of cold AI-scanning of chat logs--AI that does not take into account, to ANY extent, the context of the situation--that's patently wrong. A vast majority of the community acknowledges that the current system grossly overlooks many aspects that certainly SHOULD be taken into account when handing out the most extreme punishment.

I've never EVER been racist, homophobic, inted games etc. My 3 punishments over the course of the last 6 months all came for swearing after being baited by groups of 3 or 4. My 4th and final punishment in the form of a permaban came for responding to toxic behavior in ranked in a bout of frustration. I'm human, it happens. And I'd gladly accept 14- or even 30-day temporary bans without so much as a peep. But this feels wrong. So wrong that I cannot justify giving further business to this company. Having invested so much time and a relatively small (none the less important) amount of money, I couldn't go out without putting in my two cents. So thanks for the fun while it lasted, but this system killed it for me (and from what I've read, many others as well).

If someone can debunk this notion with a more eloquent response than the stock "WeLl YoU ShOuLd JuSt Be PeRfEcT LiKe Me," or some variation of it, I more than welcome it. I'm always open to new/original opinions.

3 Comments

Chermorg6/7/2018, 1:19:50 AM9 votes

TL;DR: The current reporting system is broken. Taking peoples money and permanently banning them under an extremely unjust and imperfect system is immensely immoral.

Whoaaaa... slow down. You gotta prove these things when you say them. You're claiming it's unjust and imperfect - any system is imperfect, first of all - but you provide no proof. You then claim it's immoral - morals have nothing to do with this.

If you have had prior punishments, and been warned that you risked a permanent ban, yet you still didn't improve, Riot does not want you to play League.

So wrong that I cannot justify giving further business to this company.

Noticed you said this - yeah, that's the goal. If you're unwilling to be a decent teammate and sportsmanlike player, Riot doesn't want your business.

Umbral Regent6/7/2018, 1:51:22 AM5 votes

If someone can debunk this notion with a more eloquent response than the stock "WeLl YoU ShOuLd JuSt Be PeRfEcT LiKe Me," or some variation of it, I more than welcome it. I'm always open to new/original opinions.

Considering that you start off with an equally stock presumption of "Riot permabans people for being human, anyone who hasn't been banned is clearly a HALO-WEARING ANGEL of ABSOLUTE INHUMAN PERFECTION and DOES NOT DESERVE TO COMMENT" - you don't seem to actually be open to new and original opinions like you say you are.

But let's be honest: they don't reward "honor" in chat, but rather the ability to carry a game to victory. That's who gets the honor in games.

How is this related to the system being broken? We're talking about the punishment system, not the Honor system.

Permabanning a person, especially by way of cold AI-scanning of chat logs--AI that does not take into account, to ANY extent, the context of the situation--that's patently wrong.

Then it's a situation of having to decide between the lesser of two evils. Do we permaban players for ignoring several warnings, or do we let those players keep coming back to foam at the mouth and shout people down, and ruin game after game after game because they can't be bothered to show a little self-control?

Personally, I'd rather not deal with people flaming and lashing out at their teammates. So, I'd prefer the "patently wrong" option over the objectively worse one.

A vast majority of the community acknowledges that the current system grossly overlooks many aspects that certainly SHOULD be taken into account when handing out the most extreme punishment.

Any proof to that effect? Because the only people thus far I've seen to disagree with how the IFS handles permanent bans have all been people who don't get the hint with the 14-day ban, and think that the system itself is the problem, rather than their inability to listen to warnings or change their behavior.

People who, hilariously, expect the rules to change for them, and think they shouldn't have to change for the rules.

My 3 punishments over the course of the last 6 months all came for swearing chewing people out after being baited by groups of 3 or 4.

Fixed that for you.

You won't get banned for swearing as long as you're swearing within reason. The occasional "shit" after a failed all-in, "fuck" when you miss a long-range ECA snipe, "dammit" when you get caught out. It's when you start swearing at other players that it becomes a problem.

My 4th and final punishment in the form of a permaban came for responding to toxic behavior in ranked in a bout of frustration.

As expected...

I'm human, it happens.

"Being human" isn't a valid excuse for ignoring three prior warnings and still making the same mistakes.

And I'd gladly accept 14- or even 30-day temporary bans without so much as a peep. But this feels wrong.

If Riot gave 30-day bans, you'd forget the offense well before your time is up. You get three chances. Your two chat restrictions, and your one 14-day ban. You should've learned after the first chat restriction, forget the temp ban. But when you straight-up ignore three prior warnings - you earned your permanent ban.

So wrong that I cannot justify giving further business to this company.

As intended.

Imperial Pandaa6/7/2018, 1:54:38 AM4 votes

I get the feeling that anyone who doesn't agree with you will just be labeled an unreasonable person. But anyways;

As far as honor goes, I have seen it go to the person who carried, but I have also seen it go to a person that people legitimately enjoyed. Whether it was the alistar who would go /All "Moo" everytime they got a kill or assist, the top laner who was getting camped/ganked constantly, or just the support/ad swapping honor (course can't prove that one); I have seen many get honored, not just those who carry. Additionally, while I cannot confirm the same effect on a Honor 2+ person, we do know that text communication does in fact effect honor progression when lvl 1 or 0. Not saying anything is neutral and you progress slowly. Being somewhat negative will actually slow progress. Positive chat will actually speed it up. I don't see why this wouldn't hold true in honor 2+.

The only time context matters is if they are quoting/repeating something a player said. Which, if that is the case, they will sometimes reduce or remove the penalty. We are taught when we are young that revenge isn't the best path. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Please provide evidence

A vast majority of the community acknowledges that the current system grossly overlooks many aspects that certainly SHOULD be taken into account when handing out the most extreme punishment.

Or go more in depth to explain what you mean. I am with holding remarks on this to make sure I understood what you meant.

Repeated offenses get harsher penalties, the same thing happens in real life too.