Riot apologists need not apply

ablindleader·Aug 15, 2019·3 votes·2,106 views

I have no problem with people disagreeing with trolls, toxic players etc. Honestly, that's what the board is about, engaging people in discourse around how the community is supposed to be. But if you intend to defend every single thing riot does. Do us all a favor a stay home. Do not post. You contribute nothing to the conversation because you are merely restating the status quo. Now if you think "riot is doing a good job with x" that is not the same as the people who go on this board just to shame people who are frustrated and angry over their ban. Of course people are frustrated and angry, the ban system punished them. The notion they are going to go from upset to understanding in a few hours or days is ridiculous. Engage their ideas and try to convince them otherwise, but when you come on here to make them feel stupid and call them toxic, you are toxic. You are a problem. You probably need to be banned as well.

27 Comments

Imperial PandaaAug 15, 20199 votes

Counter point: One cannot engage their ideas to convince them otherwise while they are in a heated/upset state.

We actually see the aforementioned often. People post asking why they got flagged and people repsond "It was probably because of x, y, and z." To which the OP then typically goes "Reee snowflake! You are a libtard if you think it is toxic. Reeee!"

Many people here agree that certain aspects of Riot's systems need to be improved; especially in the Gameplay Toxicity (troll/int/etc) area. However, verbal system doesn't need as much tweaks to it. We agree it typically does an alright job. Some tweaks people have suggested before is an extra step between 14 day and perm (in case of 14 day was due to ZT and the perm was a lesser offense they hadn't gotten to learn was not okay). Getting a warning with like 1 honor plip taken as punishment for a 1st offense to warn of behavior.

Final Counter: If you are simply coming here to throw a tantrum because you failed to follow rules and treat gellow humans with respect; do US a favor and use the Rant board if you don't want a discussion/learn from your mistakes.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

Your first counter point actually does not counter me because I clearly said "I have no problem with people disagreeing with trolls, toxic players etc. ", which includes someone mentioning specific examples to argue. I agree with the tweaks, but it's weird that you say "we". Who is this "we"? Do you speak for the entire community? You might believe it does an alright job, but I wonder if everyone generally agrees with you? Even this board is not representative given only a fraction of the community bothers to go onto it.

Finally, the fact that you characterized what I wrote as a tantrum actually proves my point. No where in my post did I rage or complain. I specified a particular trend and why I felt it was wrong. You sound like a child who cannot accept the status quo you are defending is probably not correct. Again you use US, but you only speak for you.

In short, you speak for yourself, not the community.

Imperial PandaaAug 15, 20193 votes

It was focused on the "engage their ideas" which came after the "people are upset at a punishment". The flow seemed to suggest engage upset peoples ideas instead of simply going "deserved" or something.

I use we the same way someone might use you but not actually mean you. Does everyone agree with me? Absolutely not, however there are people who may agree but don't comment. In the first instance of "We" I talk about the general boards community seeing people post while upset and lashing out at whoever disagrees with them. For the second instance, it is more about observations from other comments on older posts and seeing opinions about the system. Since they may not see this post, it is a small voice to give more input weight.

Now you are simply putting words into my mouth. I didn't specifically mean this post. I guess you characterized what I was trying to say incorrectly. You made a comment about a trend, and I in turn made my own comment on a trend that connects to it.

As for the US, there are many people who would see people post their Rants on the Rant board. Those posts are clutter and the OPs of them show no desire to discuss things. I don't pretend to speak for the whole community, but I can see how you could mischaracterize and see that.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

Your implication insinuates that this is a rant. "if you are coming here to throw a tantrum" If my original post did not seem like a tantrum to you why even bring that up? The only reason you would bring it up is if you believed to some degree it sounded like a tantrum. Also, the irony of you framing yourself as speaking for the unspoken is too much. In the same way there are people who may agree with you and do not comment, the same is true for me. In any event I did not engage in a royal we because I do not pretend to speak for them. If they agree with me they can do so on their own terms. Finally, if you can see how my characterization is valid, then perhaps you didn't properly characterize your sentiment.

I mean to be completely honest. I am purposely taking a hostile tone because it's good for the argument. Argument aside, maybe we both misinterpreted the other. Maybe we were both a bit imprecise in what we meant. I can admit I made errors, but I do not want to come across as unwilling to listen. Aside from personal attacks or over simplifications of my point, critiques are invited.

Imperial PandaaAug 15, 20192 votes

Without a doubt we have crossed wires and misunderstood eachother at certain points. That is a sad effect of written communication, things get tossed up in the air for interpretation. I full admit it doesn't help that my style of speaking can sometimes come off as weird or even pompous. Such can be chalked up to informal setting that a discussion board hosts.

The EcdysiastAug 15, 20199 votes

"People that disagree with me aren't allowed to speak."

But you're wrong.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

nice mischaracterization :)

The EcdysiastAug 15, 20192 votes

I only condensed your little rant into the one necessary sentence.

You think that people who agree with Riot have no place to speak, and that's unreasonable.

If, however, you were to say that people who always agree with Riot decisions and can't actually explain why they do shouldn't waste their time commenting, then sure. I for one am not a fan of people who hold opinions that they can't justify. But saying only that they shouldn't have a voice because of the opinion they hold is just as bad.

Similarly, your thread doesn't actually justify you point. You're mistakenly claiming that people who agree with Riot don't engage with the discussion. And while there are people who do just post their opinion with no support, there are also those who can provide valid explanations. Disregarding them is silly.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

Actually, this thread does because you are engaging in the very behavior I am saying is destructive. You mischaracterized my point because you did not understand it/ are too biased to take it. I never said people who agree with riot wholesale have no right to speak. I said people who intend to defend riot at every turn are not productive (albeit with theatrics because I like writing that way). I am not arguing for a particular burden of proof, I am merely stating the never ending cycle of holier than thou individuals insulting and yukking people who are clearly distraught and frustrated is not productive. You can disagree with them. You can provide counterpoints, but when the subtext of every comment seems to be you are a shitty person that is why you deserve to be punished, I do not think that is productive or morally correct. When people make mistakes, emphasizing the impact of their mistakes and the harm they made is much more effective than the pseudo shaming you lot engage in. You attempted to shame me by not taking what I wrote serious. In doing so, you are the shameful one.

The EcdysiastAug 15, 20193 votes

That sure is a lot of bull to try to justify you simply disliking when people prove you wrong.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

I've found when people are wrong, they need to resort to insults. Thanks for demonstrating it to everyone.

The EcdysiastAug 16, 20192 votes

Except it's not an insult. You're just plain wrong.

rujitraAug 15, 20198 votes

You must remember that defending Riot does not make someone an "apologist", nor does it mean they defend Riot in everything. I've criticized Riot for quite a few things - and fairly harshly a couple times.

Players cannot be coddled - that does not work as a punishment and reform tool. There is a reason that prisons exist. There is a reason that people are arrested. When people complain about being "soft", the problem is when you are too "soft" in punishing someone. Players who do not understand they are toxic will not suddenly understand that if you try and baby them and talk around it by avoiding calling them "toxic".

I do agree that there are some players who get heated and are ruder than is necessary sometimes, myself included. You are free to report comments you feel should be removed or go to the Boards Discord to discuss with the boards moderators.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20192 votes

Not going to get into why a penal system focused on punishment is not/ has never been effective because I do not see the point. Just know your paradigm, believing punishment is a reform tool is one that is questioned by most legal scholars today and has proven to be largely ineffective. I am not suggesting babying, actually what I am suggesting is the difference between your comment and let's say Imperial Pandaa. I gave you a lot of shit in other comments, but this comment actually engages with the discourse. I do not read it as a riot apologist comment, but as a comment that actually gives me insight into what you believe. I disagree with your fundamental premise that punishment = reform, but that's ok we do not need to agree. Now compare what Panda said, which basically ignored my critique and tried to characterize it as a tantrum. That is exactly what I am discouraging.

rujitraAug 15, 20192 votes

I don't believe punishment = reform. However, in a scale the size of League of Legends, it is impossible to encourage reform on an individual/personal level. If players are unwilling to reform after being told they must, Riot can't do much more for them - it's not possible to guide/coddle people like can be done in some real life instances.

That being said, I think you should reread what Pandaa said. Pandaa did mention they believe this is a "tantrum", but they also discuss how they believe the system does not need tweaks, and how the problem is also that the OP of many threads isn't receptive to things other than "you are toxic".

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

I actually agreed with that portion, but that does not moot his improper characterization of it as a tantrum. Perhaps you should look into your own bias. You openly admit, he characterized this as a tantrum, engaging in the very behavior I am critiquing, but then somehow use him mentioning an example of productive feedback (which I frankly agree with him on) as something that absolves him.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

Also, I agree and disagree. I think actually there are ways to signal players from engaging in bannable behavior, I wrote a post about it awhile ago and posted it to the wrong board (I posted it to the ask the community board). I agree coddling, is not ok, but I do not believe Riot is in the business of punishment. I believe Riot is in the business of prevention. They should prevent negative instances.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

Just to be clear. I did not take your comment to be an apologist comment. I felt like you made a point, that I disagree with but you spoke for yourself and gave your rationale. I appreciate it.

Zombie GerbilAug 15, 20195 votes

No.

You're wrong. And people are permitted to speak whenever, however, and on whatever they want on this public board. Regardless of your opinions, standards, or feelings. You don't make the calls and you do not make the rules.

Don't like it, then don't come here.

Period.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20192 votes

I mean, I am allowed to say those people shouldn't be listened too. Someone below me seems to agree. There are plenty of people who probably agree with me but do not want to say it because you all go on a witch hunt anytime people suggest maybe the non-toxic players are the toxic ones. The irony is you have an issue with me saying not to come here, then proceed to prescribe the same advice. Interesting. The difference between me and you is I am saying do not come here because you are causing harm and you are saying do not come here because nothing stops me from being shitty.

GatekeeperTDSAug 16, 20196 votes

anytime people suggest maybe the non-toxic players are the toxic ones

What kind of mental gymnastics are being performed here?

Zombie GerbilAug 16, 20193 votes

You're trying way too hard. I am quite sure you don't even comprehend what you're even saying. With that said, you're not relevant enough for me to have a problem with you. What I am stating, and merely stating, the world does not revolve around you. This is a public forum, which means for everyone. With it being EVERYONE's, meaning everyone have the rights to express any opinion or state expression they may wanna share.

You're allowed to state whatever you want, but you're not going to enforce anything here. Because you don't make the calls, you don't make the rules and you're not nor able to enforce them. So demanding it is pointless. So hear me when I say this; Expect Nothing.

Also, who cares what that one person things. It's a community thing, not an individual thing.

MakarakarnAug 15, 20194 votes

"You contribute nothing to the conversation" This could be said by lots of people on the boards, most of which have absolutely no sympathy for Riot or their practices

afmghostAug 16, 20193 votes

While I do agree that it is annoying to see so many riot games disciples running around the boards, they still have a say in our arguments. They may lay down their lives for the most ludicrous, asinine, bullshity things riot is infamous for, but if they want to defend them, they're more than entitled to doing so. What you're doing right now is making us critics look like close minded manchildren, and I can't say that I like it.

EybdoogAug 15, 20192 votes

Well said

TrulyBlandAug 15, 20192 votes

I think I can see where you are going with this, but giving you all the benefit of the doubt I can muster you are still phrasing it really terribly. and more specifically you are focussing on all the wrong things in the first sentences of your post.

Just because people are in support of the status quo does not mean their opinions don't matter. The current status quo also includes the fact that having a summoner name beginning with "a" is not a bannable offense. I'm sure you'd still vehemently defend that part of the status quo. And for good reason.

But even restating the status quo is surprisingly often necessary. A lot of people come onto these forums saying things like "Why am I banned? I only retaliated?". In those scenarios it's not only valid but actually an important contribution to explain that retaliation is against the rules. Stating that retaliation is against the rules in a thread where somebody asks why it is against the rules, or states that it shouldn't be against the rules… now that's obviously a worthless contribution. (Makes me think of the German minister that once explained that Marijuana is not legal because it's an illegal drug)

But defending and even just restating the status quo is not by itself a problem. And in conclusion the same thing can obviously be said about defending Riot's stance/actions. It's not exactly a far-fetched scenario that somebody simply might hold the same opinions as them. What's more: Certain topics pop up way more often than others on these forums. So even if somebody defends Riot 99% of the time, that still wouldn't actually mean they are agreeing with Riot on 99% of topics.

Shaming people and making them feel stupid is not okay. But honestly? Neither is trying to somehow link that behaviour to people defending Riot or the status quo. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

ablindleaderAug 15, 20191 votes

I do not think when you explain why someone got banned you are merely restating the status quo. I think restating the status quo is when you give a blanket statement like: retaliation is not acceptable, which we seem to agree is kind of a useless contribution. Furthermore, I am not connecting all shaming of people to all people who defend riot. In fact, I am saying people who always defend riot in these situations tend to be people engaging in shaming and making people feel stupid. They do have something to do with each other because Riot's "toxicity culture" has emboldened people from going a step past " that is not ok" to " I am going to dehumanize you because you dehumanized another." Also, I think my phrasing is appropriate, you might disagree with it because you stretched my contentions past what they were.