I would like to suggest that the Tribunal chat gets an option to show only the reported player, to make judgment of certain reports, as there are cases where other player's chat does not influence the decision, easier. I find this is the case of Offensive Language, as I am only looking to see if the reported player used suitably offensive language choices, or in cases that may have key chat phases, such as Intentionally Feeding or Verbal Abuse. Frequently there are large amounts of other text, which makes picking out the key lines to make a decision difficult, especially in games where other players may be exhibiting poor behavior as well. Mousewheel scrolling seems to be disabled in the pane as well.

I would also like to suggest that the green text in the Tribunal pages is made slightly darker, as it blends into the background to individuals with certain non-Red/Green types of colour blindness, or even those with poor eyesight in general.

This is something that we are going to be adding soon. Good call!

One of the changes that were made in the new iteration of the Tribunal is making the text a little easier to read for folks with color blindness.

So you want to make it even easier to take what people say out of context? If you are trying to make an informed decision based on what only 1 person out of 9 is saying, you are doing it wrong.

The default filter will be to show the entire chat log. I think that it would be pretty difficult to find something that could be mistaken as malicious when in actuality it's not. Either way, it should be pretty clear whether or not the offender should be punished or not.

When you're looking to make an Offensive Language call, there has to be a trade. If someone is being a jerk to a teammate, if that teammate responds with "F*** off," should that really be punished? There are a lot of times where language, taken out of context, is exponentially worse than in its original context.

This is a valid point. I hope that people will use the toggle to help put the statement in context. Personally, if I saw someone say something like that I would be intrigued to see what provoked it.

Right now as we speak I am looking at a game where this would be an issue. There is a Warwick reported for intentional feeding by two people. Just skimming through chat and reading what he says makes him look pretty guilty - he says "feed inc" and "inc feed." Most people would only read that and punish right away.

However, taking a closer look at the chat tells a completely different story. Three other players on his team were being incredibly rude and argumentative in chat the entire game, one of them appears to have been afk for most of the game, and at one point one player accuses another (not the WW) of feeding. So it's unclear if this Warwick is saying "inc feed" because he is intentionally feeding or because he is watching his ally intentionally feed. Furthermore the latter "inc feed" occurred some 45 seconds before the game ended, so maybe he intentionally fed once right before the nexus died which people do all the time. I can also see that one of his teammates starts the game off by harassing him for a bad play and laments about playing a 4v5.

To add to this injustice, the enemy team is also spamming all-chat with some silly argument about how they all want to report each other.

So if you use the player-only chat, it looks like this Warwick is 100% guilty. However if you actually take the time to read the chat you'd realize that he was likely the best behaved player on this team and it's impossible to tell if he actually did anything wrong. 100% pardon.

Fortunately this WW was kind of a **** in the other two (really? two?) games he played, so that makes voting punish easier. However in one of those games he was clearly provoked. Oh well, he'll probably get a 2-week suspension for this and life goes on.

But with cases like the OP saying he is "only looking to see if the reported player used suitably offensive language" I feel there's a disconnect somewhere. The Tribunal FAQs themselves say you should pardon if someone is reacting to another player's badgering/insulting/taunting/etc. (within reason, of course - dropping racial/ethnic/sexual slurs in response to light badgering is definitely worthy of punishment), but employing a "Reported Player Only" chat filter removes all context for the user.

It's funny, the only cases that absolutely rely on the Reported Player's chat are offensive language cases, so they're really the only cases to warrant a filter specifically for that. On the other hand, offensive language cases are the ones that most rely on the context of the language as well, so the filter makes defending yourself and the occasional explosion from a player who's been harassed all game a much worse scenario than it might actually be.

Edit: I really have to say, I'm highly opposed to this new chat filter. At first it seems like a good idea - show players only the Reported Player's chat, and then let them use the timestamps to go back and put questionable lines into context, but in practice how many people are likely to do this? It's easier to just stay in Allied Chat if you want to read the Reported Player's chat in context (which is really has to be).

It shouldn't matter what other people are saying/doing. It has been Riot's policy that the behavior of others does not justify poor behavior on your part.

even if this is true, there is some languag for which there is no excuse