The hypocrisy of RIOT: The community's frustration spoken through another player's words

fizzonyurface·Dec 3, 2016·9 votes·1,273 views

BTW, this is about the Braum "Will it jungle" spotlight on the client. We have all heard about the #1 singed main drama and how RIOT has threatened to perma ban him... then they go ahead and post this **** for everyone to see after they log in. Like come on RIOT, why do you have to be like that. I was scrolling through a couple of league pages on facebook and accidentally found this beautiful response that the REAL league community can get behind on. Please take a moment to read some of our frustration RIOT employees and owners.

"it really is disappointing seeing streams like this being supported (not to mention it's a fucking riot "employee" whatever that even means" http://prntscr.com/dero9z (WILL "CHAMPION" JUNGLE?!) being able to proclaim their spots in highlights and recognition in the community. It's inefficient and counter plays the whole "meta" everyone is so riled up into yet a bigger portion of the scene supports it. So why do one tricks that hold their own like that singed get such negativity to the point where they get banned / bad rep from the entire community when they will probably never match up with/against said player. Guess people only listen to hype/highlights instead of efficiency/stability." -He who shall not be named.

57 Comments

TrulyBlandDec 3, 20168 votes

You're mixing up something here. The singed drama was about somebody who had the role of support, going counterjungling. Riot never said anything against support-champions being used to jungle, and in fact it has been said specifically that not even the weird singed support counter jungle was the problem, but rather the way that player went about informing his team.

The problem here has never really been the inefficiency (especially as the tactic seems to have had over 50% winrate), and breaking the meta was only a problem because he did not properly communicate his unusual plan with his team, which expected a different kind of strategy to be followed.

There's absolutely no hypocrisy here that I can see as the situations you are comparing are entirely different from one another.

EschetonDec 3, 20162 votes

{quoted}

You're mixing up something here. The singed drama was about somebody who had the role of support, going counterjungling. Riot never said anything against support-champions being used to jungle, and in fact it has been said specifically that not even the weird singed support counter jungle was the problem, but rather the way that player went about informing his team.

The problem here has never really been the inefficiency (especially as the tactic seems to have had over 50% winrate), and breaking the meta was only a problem because he did not properly communicate his unusual plan with his team, which expected a different kind of strategy to be followed.

There's absolutely no hypocrisy here that I can see as the situations you are comparing are entirely different from one another.

Close, but not entirely. SupportSinged did communicate. It's just that people reacted like a bigoted dad to his gay son: "fuck no" And Riot enforced that reaction. Saying "he" should adapt if people aren't on board with the plan. "Don't be gay, they don't like it." Which is punishing him for other people's small-mindedness.

SarutobiDec 3, 20168 votes

{quoted}

Close, but not entirely. SupportSinged did communicate. It's just that people reacted like a bigoted dad to his gay son: "fuck no" And Riot enforced that reaction. Saying "he" should adapt if people aren't on board with the plan. "Don't be gay, they don't like it." Which is punishing him for other people's small-mindedness.

He didn't communicate. Communication is like "hey guys can I try out singed support?" Not ok guys I'm playing singed support I don't care what you guys say it's going to happen. If people cannot have any input on the matter then it's not communicating. You are forcing people to play by your rules when that is against the rules. This is a game meant to be fun. Forcing people to do anything is never fun!

LordGeovanniDec 3, 20161 votes

Communication isnt asking for permission its telling people what you are doing whether they like it or not is completely irrelivant though not optimal

ModUlanopoDec 3, 20166 votes

{quoted}

Communication isnt asking for permission its telling people what you are doing whether they like it or not is completely irrelivant though not optimal

Communication is a dialogue. What you are describing is giving orders.

LordGeovanniDec 4, 20161 votes

Communication is letting people know what you are going to do whether they want it to happen or not is completely irrelivant to communication besides them communicating back and just like they may not like what you want you may not like what they want. as you arent telling any one to do anything you arnt giveing orders

ModUlanopoDec 4, 20163 votes

In this we disagree.

LordGeovanniDec 8, 20161 votes

com·mu·ni·ca·tion kəˌmyo͞onəˈkāSH(ə)n/ noun noun: communication

1.
the imparting or exchanging of information or news.

disagree but disagree with a dictionary arbitrary feelings that seem to be the basis for riots punishment system

ModUlanopoDec 8, 20162 votes

{quoted}

com·mu·ni·ca·tion kəˌmyo͞onəˈkāSH(ə)n/ noun noun: communication
1.
the imparting or exchanging of information or news.

Yes, but the dictionary does little to explain the way in which communication works. So, "I'm going to do this thing, regardless of how you feel" and "Hey, would it be okay if I did this thing" both fit the technical definition of communication, but have vastly different intents and effects. The former is arrogant and unyielding, which is why the player was suspended.

disagree but disagree with a dictionary arbitrary feelings that seem to be the basis for riots punishment system

I find that most people generally know the correct thing to do at any given moment. The only question is whether or not they have the willpower to carry through.

Can you give me an example of an "arbitrary feeling" that you feel is punished?

LordGeovanniDec 9, 20161 votes

What you are pushing is not the definition of the word but societal acceptance of outspoken people views and its not fair to expect some one to automatically know what is generally acceptable and not through unspoken agreement of a group of people who are around but not telling them. The word has a definition but is being used in another way. That is takeing saying you need a hammer useing a screwdriver and saying that its a hammer just because it can knock the nails in. Arbitrary feelings dictateing how you guys feel and if people dont agree with your feelings they are demonized because they dont have the exact same common sense that you do. Like i have said you guys are pushing that the guy should have communicated with his team which he did but by saying that he needs to communicate what you guys want is for him to seek his team approval which goes beyond communication. You are pushing him asking for permission under the guise of communication (mind you guys arent wholly wrong as communication does encompass asking for permission but communication is not in itself asking for permission).

ModUlanopoDec 10, 20164 votes

{quoted}

What you are pushing is not the definition of the word but societal acceptance of outspoken people views and its not fair to expect some one to automatically know what is generally acceptable and not through unspoken agreement of a group of people who are around but not telling them.

If I accept your premise for a moment, what you're arguing is then the polar opposite. You're saying that people are completely ignorant of social norms and that's flatly nonsense.

You're also saying that it's unreasonable to have ANY expectations of our teammates, which is equally ridiculous.

Okay, back to my actual argument, which is that everybody needs to be flexible sometimes. This guy was never flexible, which is what got him punished.

The word has a definition but is being used in another way. That is takeing saying you need a hammer useing a screwdriver and saying that its a hammer just because it can knock the nails in.

I suppose we can get lost in the weeds parsing the technical definitions of words, if that's what really makes you happy. I mean, the old 50's TV broadcasts slowly crossing the vastness of space might count as communication if aliens receive and decode them, but they have about as much relevance to League as this guy's pronouncements at the beginning of a match. They're about as useful, too.

Arbitrary feelings dictateing how you guys feel and if people dont agree with your feelings they are demonized because they dont have the exact same common sense that you do.

I find it more than a little insulting when people discredit the feelings and wants of others, simply because they disagree with them. There's nothing "arbitrary" or "random" about them, any more than those terms apply to your feelings. It's a sign of emotional maturity when you can disagree with someone's feelings, yet still sympathize with them.

Like i have said you guys are pushing that the guy should have communicated with his team which he did but by saying that he needs to communicate what you guys want is for him to seek his team approval which goes beyond communication. You are pushing him asking for permission under the guise of communication (mind you guys arent wholly wrong as communication does encompass asking for permission but communication is not in itself asking for permission).

Meh. That was a whole bunch of gobbledy%%%% that boils down to "no one should ever have to accommodate anyone else, ever." You can espouse that cabin-in-the-woods form of libertarianism all you want. The rest of us aren't buying it.

LordGeovanniDec 10, 20161 votes

Im not saying people are ignorant of social norms im saying that people may not know what the norms of your society is as social norms dont mean the same thing from say schools to schools, business to business, home to home, state to state etc. You cant expect some one who you dont know to automatically know what you consider normal in your area.

PROJECT FizzDec 4, 20165 votes

Communication is a two way street pal. They had no say in a strategy they knew nothing about. They were forced into a gameplay pattern most of them DIDNT know. That's not fair to them. He did not communicate. He told them what he was doing, and ignored any and all backlash.

EschetonDec 3, 20161 votes

{quoted}

He didn't communicate. Communication is like "hey guys can I try out singed support?" Not ok guys I'm playing singed support I don't care what you guys say it's going to happen. If people cannot have any input on the matter then it's not communicating. You are forcing people to play by your rules when that is against the rules. This is a game meant to be fun. Forcing people to do anything is never fun!

No, he had a copy paste of what he does. And how they could make that work.

We force with everything we do. Every single movement in game forces a reaction. Every champion, every map movement, every spell thrown. All force you to interpret and adapt.

It's like going an ad midlaner. And top and jungle not adapting with an ap pick when later in the pick rotation. Picking an ad midlaner communicates something (in this case without words). But you would be surprised how often you end up with a full ad team. And that is the problem. Not the ad pick. And not the singedsupport.

ModUlanopoDec 3, 20163 votes

{quoted}

No, he had a copy paste of what he does. And how they could make that work.

Not giving people the option to say no and never adapting his play amounted to hijacking the match. There are five people on the team, not one.

EschetonDec 3, 20161 votes

{quoted}

Not giving people the option to say no and never adapting his play amounted to hijacking the match. There are five people on the team, not one.

Never adapting play? Tell that to all the teams running it down mid while mid has already got supers.

TrulyBlandDec 3, 20164 votes

Never said he didn't communicate. I said he didn't communicate properly, in that he only informed people very late, not leaving them a proper amount of time to adapt to his strategy, e.g. by picking a safer adc. You seem to dislike that Riot thinks he should adapt to his team's wishes... but at the same time you seem to think that people should adapt to his plan, which they couldn't even properly do because once again: He told people way too late about it.

LordGeovanniDec 3, 20161 votes

The thing is you have to que up as one of the roles even though riot says they dont enforce going to those roles and they balance champions around those roles and not being individually good champions or being able to function in any role supports gotta have low damage on high cooldowns unless they are also mages. That is hypocrisy.

TrulyBlandDec 3, 20162 votes

As Riot pointed out when they implemented that feature, you have to queue up as one of these because they decided to make that the default. From the very beginning they said, that if you communicate with your team and can come to an agreement, you can do whatever the hell you want to do. The role selection is not to enforce a strategy, but so there is a defined default so that people don't go into the game with different expectations, and to lower the chance of people fighting over a role.

Singed didn't look for an agreement and only informed his team extremely late that he would deviate from that default strategy.

LordGeovanniDec 3, 20161 votes

again Communication is not equal to confimation

TrulyBlandDec 3, 20161 votes

Riot defined a default to minimize fights within the team. If you want to deviate from the default, you need to come to an agreement of some sort... or at the very least show any will to come to an agreement rather than basically stating "this is what I will do, fuck everybody else's opinion".

You are oversimplifying the case, you are oversimplfying Riot's design decisions around the meta and you are oversimplifying the differences between mages and supports. Maybe you should start actually reading into these subjects a bit more rather than throwing around those black and white statements. It's easy to see hyprocrisy everywhere, when you refuse to look at nuances.

LordGeovanniDec 4, 20161 votes

Riot doesn't support a meta archetype. so you are free to play any champ how you want to play it as long as you are trying to win the game and not intentionally lose it and that doesnt need to be communicated. Its just up to people not to see one champion and get tilted to lessen their own chances at winning. I try to win no matter what but when i see vayne yasou lee sin on either team i think these dam champions again and gravitate away from them if i say im not comfortable with those champions being played will the player get banned hell no because playing a champion isnt bannable nor is playing it in diffrent postions ive seen all of them in diffrent positions than their meta position and in support too i dont think any of the players got banned for it. no one ever communicated to me what they were doing. All of the grounds for the punishment are built on material softer than marshmallow. on the vague potiential feelings of other players that you have no control over as far as you know they could have been tilted by you walking too far up a lane, playing a meta support that they dont like, dieing once. the grounds for punishing him is lack of communication when he supposedly posted a paragraph every game when you could just mute the other players

haha retardDec 3, 20164 votes

Before you know it, this post will go in the anti-Riot graveyard with all the other anti-Riot posts. No one wants to make constructive debate about anything anti-Riot on the forums and god forbid you do. Because that shits gettin downvoted and burning in hell real quick.

DamagefoxDec 3, 20162 votes

Then we need to counter with active upvotes.

haha retardDec 3, 20163 votes

They literally have formed groups on the forums made specifically to mass downvote anything anti-Riot. Unless we are able to get a mass public appeal it's pretty useless, besides no Rioter ever comes on the recent parts of Player Behavior and Moderation.

TrulyBlandDec 3, 201611 votes

[{quoted}](name=Yo Lemon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=r1PGtEAl,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2016-12-03T08:32:42.437+0000)

They literally have formed groups on the forums made specifically to mass downvote anything anti-Riot. Unless we are able to get a mass public appeal it's pretty useless, besides no Rioter ever comes on the recent parts of Player Behavior and Moderation.

Really? Just checked redtracker and over a third of the posts within the last 24 hours were on PB&M. But I suppose people who care for the actual facts rather than riling up emotions are all part of this weird little conspiracy you seem to believe in.

haha retardDec 3, 20161 votes

Tell my how many Rioters have commented on anti-Riot posts. They literally pay no attention to them.

A third on one thread..

EvilDustManDec 3, 20163 votes

[{quoted}](name=Yo Lemon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=r1PGtEAl,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-03T22:06:15.965+0000)

Tell my how many Rioters have commented on anti-Riot posts. They literally pay no attention to them.

Why should they?

haha retardDec 3, 20162 votes

Put this into perspective. Our presidents, the good ones that we have had, had to elect cabinets of their choosing. Most of these president's took in people that didn't agree with what they agreed with to drive constructive feedback. Now take the forums as the cabinet for league. If you just have a bunch of people that agree with everything you do and you have another half who hates what you do. Well, your game is only going one way if you only listen to one side, but if you mix the amount of feedback you acquire and pay attention to the anti-Riot and the pro-Riot at some point there will be a soft spot that will make the game better for everyone. Not just one side. Not only this, but not all anti-Riot posts are flaming riot saying oh you guys are a fucked company who only cares about money, it's most of the time people who want the game to be better but it gets downvoted so quick that they don't even see it.

EvilDustManDec 3, 20163 votes

[{quoted}](name=Yo Lemon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=r1PGtEAl,comment-id=0001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-03T22:23:34.811+0000)

Put this into perspective. Our presidents, the good ones that we have had, had to elect cabinets of their choosing. Most of these president's took in people that didn't agree with what they agreed with to drive constructive feedback. Now take the forums as the cabinet for league. If you just have a bunch of people that agree with everything you do and you have another half who hates what you do. Well, your game is only going one way if you only listen to one side, but if you mix the amount of feedback you acquire and pay attention to the anti-Riot and the pro-Riot at some point there will be a soft spot that will make the game better for everyone. Not just one side. Not only this, but not all anti-Riot posts are flaming riot saying oh you guys are a fucked company who only cares about money, it's most of the time people who want the game to be better but it gets downvoted so quick that they don't even see it.

Who says they don't? Obama doesn't go and ask rednecks why they hate him so much.

haha retardDec 3, 20162 votes

Thanks for bringing me back to my main point, please go look at some more anti-Riot posts and tell me how many of them have been commented on by Rioters.

Also, I said most, just because Obama doesn't didn't mean the rest didn't do it...

EvilDustManDec 3, 20163 votes

[{quoted}](name=Yo Lemon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=r1PGtEAl,comment-id=000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-12-03T22:33:50.405+0000)

Thanks for bringing me back to my main point, please go look at some more anti-Riot posts and tell me how many of them have been commented on by Rioters.

Also, I said most, just because Obama doesn't didn't mean the rest didn't do it...

I'm saying that most of the anti-Riot posts are by angry vehement rednecks and trying to talk to them usually results in nothing. Same reason Riot doesn't respond to every 'this champion is OP, riot you suck' thread.

haha retardDec 4, 20162 votes

Yeah, but you can see that from the title, it doesn't take much to look at a post that is anti-Riot that is also constructive.

Great MutaDec 4, 20161 votes

You know these RBSC(Rito Butt Slappers Club) members. They downvote anything anti-Rito and keep the passive aggression high.

We will take this forum back.

EvilDustManDec 3, 201610 votes

[{quoted}](name=Yo Lemon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=r1PGtEAl,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2016-12-03T08:32:42.437+0000)

They literally have formed groups on the forums made specifically to mass downvote anything anti-Riot. Unless we are able to get a mass public appeal it's pretty useless, besides no Rioter ever comes on the recent parts of Player Behavior and Moderation.

No, it gets down voted because people keep beating this dead horse after Riot specifically came out with why Support Singed was given a punishment.

LordGeovanniDec 3, 20162 votes

and its keeps being brought back up because its contradictory to their summoners code.

TrulyBlandDec 3, 20165 votes

Singed left out crucial information on his playstyle until after people would be able to properly adapt to it, which most certainly goes against the spirit of supporting your team. He also only informed people of what he was going to do regardless of their input, which means he was not flexible and open minded in his choice of strategy, as the summoner's code suggests.

In short: Singed's behaviour verifiably contradicted the summoner's code. Regardless of whether you believe it was an infraction worthy of a punishment, Riot's decision was perfectly in line with the summoner's code.

LordGeovanniDec 3, 20161 votes

the thing is who has time to type paragraphs out in the first 1 minute30 seconds of a game wait you want the other people to read and respond too so the first 15 -20 seconds of a game. should an adc have to type they just want to farm in lane and if the support says no the adc have to play aggressively. this game doesnt have easy ways to communicate out side or pings and pings dont have a lets play aggressive ping or a im counter jungleing the enemy ping. that thing about communication is cop out bullshit because you dont have the time to communicate and communication is not confirmation and saying that your allies have to agree opens a whole other can of worms and people will start reporting because some one didnt agree with them again or didnt agree with a push or didnt group.

Riot punishing him was a bs and they even backed on it by saying that maybe he didnt deserve to be threatened with a ban. Because as far as i know all things resulting in punishment in the game go from chat bans to game timer extentions to temp bans to perma bans. There is no such thing as only deserves punishment up to this level. They copped out but they just couldn't say that he didn't deserve to be punished because he already had been punished and then people were gonna ask what riot was gonna do to make it right.

TrulyBlandDec 3, 20162 votes

It has been said often enough that he had that paragraph copy pasted. I'd also argue you have a lot of time in 1 minute and 30 seconds to type paragraphs. There's pretty much nothing else you have to do within that time. Even 15-20 seconds are enough for most people to type out one or two sentences to already give people a proper idea of what you are planning.

What kind of an early game the adc will focus on is usually apparent from the lane setup, and you know what? I've had the most success with adcs that actually do inform me of whether they plan an aggressive or a defensive early game, because it means I can adjust my support champion, my ability-priorities and in some cases items and masteries accordingly.

You keep talking about how communication is not confirmation, but even without looking at the issue you simplify to confirmation, that singed did an intentionally poor job at communicating his intents, because he intentionally waited before pasting his already copied paragraph until after people have made their picks, presumably to avoid any discussion.

Your point about chat restriction / timed bans / permabans is an (understandable) misunderstanding from your part. This was a manual ban, not a ban by the automated system. They have also been fairly clear on the part of this being a highly unusual case, meaning it won't be included in the automated system, either. And if they are already manually issueing these bans, then obviously they can also adjust the severity of the punishment according to the unusual case.

As to whether Riot believes he should have been punished: Let's just say there have been cases exactly like this in the past. People banned for "breaking the meta", when they really were just communicating their intents in ways that were harmful to team play. The decision to punish Singed is highly consistent with Riot's decisions in the past.

As a final note: You fail to actually adress my point of him obviously breaking the summoner's code. You also still fail to support your claim that Riot was acting contradictory to the summoner's code.

LordGeovanniDec 4, 20161 votes

Regardless of whether he had a paragraph that is not sufficent time to reliably type a long complex strategy. If he did indeed have a paragraph that means he went the extra mile to communicate but still got punished anyway. Riot says you should communicate but people often go into matches and mute everyone. i wasnt talking about auto bans i was talking about the order of punishments that is deemed the process to go through whether automated or manual you are to be punished by that order if something doesnt change and to to say that the person didnt deserve the next level of punishment means that he didnt deserve punishment at all but you arent willing to admit it because you had already punished him because if he was still doing what you punished him for then he deserves the next level of punishment.. riot punished him because a high volume of players got upset that they couldnt understand what the singed player wanted so they called him a troll. He got punished because players were tilting themselves supposedly and not trying to win because they had a pick on their team that they deemed troll If riot has it stated that they are not gonna inforce a meta and punish you because you played off meta (and not communicating it even though he was communicateing it) That is a contradiction. and the only reason they cant come out and say that the ban wasnt deserved is because players will call them out them for their decision in punishing the player in the first place in even greater numbers than what is happening now. they stepped back on saying that he wasnt communicateing because the youtubers who covered it showed that he was indeed communicateing contrary to what riot said and then they came out and said that he was communicateing themselves and decided not to punish him more. all this in a time that doesnt allow for addiquite communication so he catually went the extra mile to communicate.

TrulyBlandDec 4, 20162 votes

Regardless of whether he had a paragraph that is not sufficent time to reliably type a long complex strategy.

"Pick a safe adc, I'm going to be roaming and counterjungling occasionally." How much time does it take to type that?

If he did indeed have a paragraph that means he went the extra mile to communicate but still got punished anyway.

Yeah, he went the extra mile to inform his teammates... just that he did that at a point where people could not adjust to his strategy anymore, completely nullyfing the point.

i wasnt talking about auto bans

So if you accept that it's a manual ban, why can't you accept that a case this unusual would receive a punishment decided by a human based on the case?

And from then on you are really just going by false assumptions. False assumptions on what are the reasons People reported him, false assumptions on why Riot banned him. False assumptions on why they keep him banned. False assumptions on what Riot means when they want you to "communicate with your team". And finally, false assumptions on how long it takes to write a simple short warning to your adc, that he will have to stand 1v2 fairly often.

And you know what the worst part is? All of this has been said so often before, that it is obvious you do not want to hear the facts, because if you did, you would have found them on your own by now.

LordGeovanniDec 8, 20161 votes

"Pick a safe adc, I'm going to be roaming and counterjungling occasionally." How much time does it take to type that?

And i didnt pick smite to steal our jungle camps. no im not takeing smite to troll. no im not takeing exhaust. etc sure your example works if your allies trust what you are doing and dont demand you to pick what they want and just decide to just not think they can win the game and play worse themselves (tilt themselves which is what he was punished for other people tilting themselves)

TrulyBlandDec 8, 20161 votes

Yes. My example helps the team in those cases where the team has a bit of trust, whereas the way that Singed went about it didn't help in those cases, and probably made things worse in all other cases. And if he acted the way I suggested he could not be blamed for not informing his team up ahead because he at least tried.

This is the exact same principle as intentional feeding vs. unintentional feeding: If you try your best, people might still flame you, but Riot won't punish you... even if you fail. But if you stop trying and just run into the enemy fountain over and over, because you are convinced the game is lost anyway, that's very much punishable.

LordGeovanniDec 9, 20161 votes

just as few comments ago you yourself said that it has been said that he posted a paragraph detailing what he was going to do. What you suggest borders more on telling your team what to do than what he does its not up to him to make his team pick a safe adc. which is what people are saying that he is doing by not playing meta forceing his team to play how he wants. Im saying that pregame time isnt enough to significantly tell any one anything not that you need to explain anything to them just like every other game people are playing to win if you want to tilt yourself by assumeing troll you are causeing yourself to lose. I report intentional feeders regularly and most of them even type in chat why they are feeding i dont see much feed back that any one is punished last punishment feed back i got was 2 months ago at least 20 since then who in chat ratted them self out and its that high because i play the game so frequently daily as if you played less games daily or weekly naturally the number of intentional feeders you run into decreases. thats only the guys who said that they were feeding intentionally for so and so reason in chat

TrulyBlandDec 9, 20161 votes

Just a few comments ago I myself also explained that he posted that paragraph too late for people to properly adjust to it, as they already picked champions at that point.

It's not up to him to make his team pick a safe adc, but it's definitely up to him to inform his team that he's using a strategy they are not expecting, so they CAN pick a safe adc or whatever the fuck they want.

The point is that he should inform his team before their optinos to adjust to his strategy diminish.

But hey, if you had actually read my post "a few comments ago", you'd know that already. You conveniently forget my arguments as we discuss. This is beyond pointless.

So here's a final summary of the point I'm making:

How it should have been: "Btw, I'm going to use this strategy, plan accordingly." Everybody picks.

Here's how it effectively was: Everybody picks. "Btw, I'm going to use this strategy. If your picks don't work with that... well, sucks to be you."

LordGeovanniDec 10, 20161 votes

Your example coincides with every person who picks a poke mage last pick in a dive composition. They dont get punished for not communicateing. <<< communication isnt necessary for this game nor is it enforced until you go some thing support that people arent used to. Nor is there sufficent time to explain extra stuff unless you prepare before hand which you cant make people do.

TrulyBlandDec 11, 20161 votes

{quoted}

Your example coincides with every person who picks a poke mage last pick in a dive composition. They dont get punished for not communicateing. <<< communication isnt necessary for this game nor is it enforced until you go some thing support that people arent used to. Nor is there sufficent time to explain extra stuff unless you prepare before hand which you cant make people do.

You're just looking at a bad pick into an enemy team composition. That affects you and you alone. If you can pull it off, you might be able to offset the disadvantage that you personally get from your pick.

Singed didn't impose a disadvantage on himself, but on his teammates, specifically the ADC. That's a huge difference.

So here's a better example of a similar situation: Everybody in your team picks. There's an AD top, and AD jungle locked in, as well as a low-damage support and a pure physical ADC... and you then go and pick Zed mid. This imposes a disadvantage on your team, because the enemy can simply stack armor and will (if clever enough) do so. Your pick essentially lowered the damage of everybody else on your team.

But here's the thing: You ignore that the quantity and consistency of the offense played a big role in Riot's decision. So yeah, probably, if you kept picking Zed mid into (up to that point) full AD compositions consistently and over hundreds of games, you would likely get the exact same punishment. But it's practically impossible to even run into that harmful scenario consistently, as it requires specific team compositions and being last pick.

MartensiticDec 3, 20168 votes

No one wants to make constructive debate about anything anti-Riot on the forums

No one so far created a constructive anti-riot debate.

Because repeating the same lies and bullsh* about the singed ban over and over again, is not "debating".

haha retardDec 3, 20161 votes

I understand the OP might have brought something up about support singed, but I never did. If you would like to look at my original comment you may.

MartensiticDec 4, 20161 votes

The comment isn't specifically addressed towards you, nor towards the singed issue in particular.

Its an example for basically every single self-proclaimed "Anti-Riot-Discussion", because almost every single one of them is founded on:

inchoherent ramblings

*feelings of entitlement from spoiled brats

balance discussions by people who couldn't balance their own feet on flat ground
lies
misconceptions.

Or to make a long sentence short:

So far, they have all been completely moronic garbage.

That's not to say that there weren't good ones in the past. Dynamic Queue discussions where Rito was publicly called out for their BS, with the community countering everything we got fed, alot of those were brilliant, which reflected in the upvotes they got.

But so far, during preseason, I have not seen a single good discussion against something Riot did in the last few weeks, especially not by this 5-6 people cadre of self-proclaimed "critics".