The universal rule "Don't be a jerk" should include campaigning for the firing of Riot employees

Shíny·Feb 12, 2015·12 votes·1,210 views

Topics that campaign for the firing or removal of rioters from their positions should be included in the "don't be a jerk" rule. They're terribly unproductive and contribute nothing to the boards. Example

9 Comments

PryotraFeb 12, 20156 votes

I'd buy it... except I remember The Beard, as well as Randuin.

While that particular example is a pretty good one in your favor, I do feel that raising issue with a certain employee over dubious actions should be allowed.

Lysdexic1Feb 12, 20153 votes

{quoted}

I'd buy it... except I remember The Beard, as well as Randuin.

While that particular example is a pretty good one in your favor, I do feel that raising issue with a certain employee over dubious actions should be allowed.

But demanding them to be fired on the spot is not productive in any way. That isn't the only thread I've seen like that, in fact that's one of the more tame ones. You can ask Riot employees to justify their stance but please just don't be a jerk about it.

PryotraFeb 13, 20153 votes

Except in the instances where there are no justifications.

The examples I mentioned, Randuin and The Beard, fall into that category. Randuin literally perma-banned someone out of spite, and The Beard... is why we don't have CM's any more. Yeah, that bad.

They may be few and far between, but when instances occur where there is no justification to be had I cannot condone a rule like this. In situations like the one you mentioned, I think the current rule already applies, and frankly the vote system seems to weed them out fairly well.

MXXIVFeb 13, 20151 votes

What's CM?

PryotraFeb 13, 20151 votes

CM stands for Community Manager.

The Beard was in a program called the Riot Ambassadors. That program was effectively Riots attempt at using Community Managers. Thing is, they weren't really implemented correctly and acted as more of a wall between the community and Riot rather than a bridge. The Beard made several poor copy-pasted responses that CLEARLY didn't apply, and in some cases were down right insulting, which ultimately culminated in the community flooding the forums with his last outrageous reply until Tryndamere had to come in and announced that A) The Ambassador program was ended, and B) The Beard got "trimmed."

Seeing as Riot learns from failure by way of "NEVER AGAIN," They decided to never used Community Managers ever again. Even though they were implemented incorrectly from the get go.

DaenFeb 13, 20151 votes

Just to add onto this, there were a lot of problems with Riot Ambassadors; it wasn't just the wall thing that was a problem.

The Riot Ambassador account was a faceless entity with no personality.
Multiple Rioters shared a single account, so you never knew what to expect.
Riot Ambassadors were not properly supported or maintained from the community perspective.
Responses were constantly very clearly copy-pasted and often totally unrelated.
Ambassadors were a direct break in the communication pathways between the community and the developers.

Seeing as Riot learns from failure by way of "NEVER AGAIN," They decided to never used Community Managers ever again. Even though they were implemented incorrectly from the get go.

I really hope that Riot Ambassadors aren't the reason Riot is so opposed to Community Managers. The system was irrevocably flawed in many ways (as listed above) and honestly had nothing to do with what Community Managers are really about.

From my experience, you are totally right about the way Riot learns from failure. It's really concerning, because failure is supposed to be a learning tool; it's not supposed to be a barrier that you just run into and give up.