Shouldn't it go both ways?

Saezio·1/15/2019, 11:50:35 PM·2 votes·2,980 views

Why do reports that result in punishment drop someones honor but honors don't cancel out reports? I mean if someone gets 200 honors they should not be punished for 5 reports, be they valid or not.(barring cases of hate speech, racism, self harm promotion OF COURSE) Numbers are an example but you get the idea. And also there are 9 people that can report someone but only 4 that can honor them. So by the previous example, the opinions of 200 players carry less weight than that of 5 players. Is this fair? (I was not punished and will not be punished, I do not flame or harass people. I am only looking at this from a philosophical perspective.) How many good reviews should cancel out a bad one? Discuss please, I want to see arguments and not parallels to murderers or thieves and prison.

42 Comments

ModThe Djinn1/16/2019, 12:19:10 AM9 votes

Why do reports that result in punishment drop someones honor but honors don't cancel out reports?

Because the idea of being an honorable player is dynamically opposed to the idea of being a toxic player. If you are toxic enough that the system flags your behavior, you are not being honorable, no matter how many awards you get from other players. This is because there is no way to ensure that honor is given for truly honorable behavior: you can give it to anyone you want, for any reason.

The other factor is that not everything is equal. League takes toxicity very seriously, and a few games of fine behavior do not justify the one where you ruin the game for your teammates with foul behavior.

There is some leeway built into the system, but it is not related to honor because -- as mentioned earlier -- there is no system ensuring that honor is only given for truly honorable actions, but there is a system ensuring that punishments are only given for toxic actions.

Dynikus1/15/2019, 11:52:59 PM3 votes

I want to see arguments and not parallels to murderers or thieves and prison

But it's the same concept. You can be a great person your whole life, do one fucked up thing, and get life in prison for it.

Honors aren't the antithesis of reports, so there's no reason they should cancel each other out. The amount of reports you get in a game is also completely irrelevant. 1 or 9, all they do is trigger a review of the game.

Telephone Booth1/16/2019, 1:39:45 AM2 votes

No, rules are still rules and it doesn't matter how good a person you are. If you break them, consequences follow. It's just the nature of rules. Just curious, why do you specifically think hate speech and promotion of self harm are exceptional?

Hotarµ1/15/2019, 11:56:41 PM2 votes

Honors don't (and shouldn't) shield you from receiving punishment. If you do something wrong, you deserve to face the consequences regardless of how well you behaved beforehand.

Also, multiple reports don't get innocent accounts punished. It only takes 1 valid report to trigger a punishment, false ones and mass reports don't amount to anything.

Umbral Regent1/16/2019, 5:02:40 PM2 votes

I mean if someone gets 200 honors they should not be punished for 5 reports, be they valid or not.

If we're going to discuss the concept of Honors cancelling out Reports/mattering in regards to punishments, then we can't really be playing fast and loose with the system working.

"Be they valid or not" implies that a punishment occurs not based on the actual behavior, but because of the amount of reports filed against someone. That's not the case.

So, since we're discussing Honors cancelling out Reports, we have to assume that the reports are valid - 'cause invalid reports are thrown out regardless.

How many good reviews should cancel out a bad one?

My answer is "none". Assigning an arbitrary amount of Honors to effectively cancel out behavior that would otherwise be punishment-worthy would be a bad idea, if not a generally pointless one.

As it stands, one could be Honored for just about anything, regardless of whether or not they actually behaved well. And, to use part of your original post here;

So by the previous example, the opinions of 200 players carry less weight than that of 5 players.

In the context of 5 matches, all with valid reports, should the opinions of 15 players outweigh the fact that someone broke the rules? Should it outweigh the opinion of 5 players that their match was made significantly worse for the behavior of the reported player?

And this is just a general issue with the idea of Honors cancelling out Reports. One other problem I can think of right off-hand is taking into account premade Honors.

ModBianca Colt1/16/2019, 12:17:25 AM1 votes

I don't think honours should act as a countermeasure against reports. The whole point of having a high honor standing is to know that you're displaying a sportsmanlike and positive behaviour (or at least remaining neutral). Breaking the rules and shielding yourself with honour wouldn't make much sense, since the obtention of honour is, in fact, dependent on your (positive) behaviour in the first place.

Saezio1/16/2019, 12:00:15 AM1 votes

OK since you are both sticking to the 9 reports part. It means that in 100 games played there are 900 people "likely" to report you and 400 people "likely" to honor you. Not that multiple reports in a single game matter more

Sona Ping1/16/2019, 1:21:25 AM1 votes

{quoted}

Why do reports that result in punishment drop someones honor but honors don't cancel out reports? I mean if someone gets 200 honors they should not be punished for 5 reports, be they valid or not.(barring cases of hate speech, racism, self harm promotion OF COURSE) Numbers are an example but you get the idea. And also there are 9 people that can report someone but only 4 that can honor them. So by the previous example, the opinions of 200 players carry less weight than that of 5 players. Is this fair? (I was not punished and will not be punished, I do not flame or harass people. I am only looking at this from a philosophical perspective.) How many good reviews should cancel out a bad one? Discuss please, I want to see arguments and not parallels to murderers or thieves and prison.

"Shouldn't it go both ways?" Why should it? You're writing as if there is some opposition between the two but there isn't. Those two things are for entirely different purposes. You're creating the idea that they are parts of the same system that are not working together incorrectly when that is not the situation at all. The honor system has become a way to try to incentivize acting like an adult and just playing the game and the restrictions/suspensions are given for consistent violations of the standards for using the service. You end up acknowledging as much in barring cases. And they're not weighed together, nor were they intended to in the first place. Your idea doesn't work in concept and not even in practice. You can find games where the biggest jerk in the room is making that fact obvious in allchat the entire game and then at the end screen he gets three honors because the takedowns from last onesided teamfight happened to fall into a multikill on him.

Peel for my ADC1/16/2019, 1:47:04 AM1 votes

This basically sounds like , you can be as toxic as you want if you hard carry the majority of your games

Kei1431/16/2019, 12:54:35 AM1 votes

Honors themselves don't cancel out reports, but clean games do cancel out reports. Afterall, that's how you drop punishment tiers.

Saezio1/16/2019, 12:09:22 AM1 votes

I might as well have said " ONLY GIVE METAPHORS AND ANALOGIES GUYS "

If you want an applicable analogy go for a classroom and have a kid never get in trouble then call a classmate a moron or something. Come on you can't be actually taking the game that seriously

ModArticus431/16/2019, 12:10:57 AM1 votes

Resource dependence is a large part of why reports/honors will never be equal. I also question the morality of diminishing negative behavior because of past good behavior -- as well as being fairly exploitable.

Courts in the US (even traffic/magistrate courts) utilize mitigating/aggravating circumstances, one of those being past behavior. But they never use them to try and completely balance the scale because we still need to be judged in the present for the most part.

To one of your points though... I think not allowing enemies to honor each other is completely ludicrous for exactly the reason you pointed out. I understand their logic: we want as many chances to find bad behavior as we possibly can. Like you mentioned though, why shouldn't we also be looking for chances to find great behavior as well?

I hate the fixation with finding negativity. I understand its purpose, but I hate the attitude that comes with it. It's why I will argue against increasing IFS penalty notifications for the reporters all.day.long.