http://na.leagueoflegends.com/tribun.../5933607/#nogo

Player was pardoned, Even after case 2, telling people to eat dick. calling his team "useless"
and telling players they are bad and in btm elo for a reason.

So yada yada yada 2nd review

BUT!

I THINK this player was pardoned because honestly his other 4 games i would have pardoned. So 4/5 of the cases; pardon. But what if he got just 1 reported case, or just 2. Lets say the tribunal throws report 1 and 2 at us(the collective tribunal). I would imagine more players would punish.

Does the amount of reports per case effect your decisions? Isn't it inevitable to be unbiased when u have different amounts of evidence either positive or negitive?

I feel you are asking more then one simple question that the title suggests.

But to be clear, Riot has already stated the system is not perfect and they have no expectation of a "perfect" system where the guilty will always be punished, etc. Such a thing exists for no game and never will.

It's also impossible to have no bias when asking a public community to vote on such things. So no expectation exists there either.

I would think the perfect solution to this is have a consitent number of reports per case. right?

Care to clarify?

The way I read it: you want there to be a rule where there must be X amount of reports to go to Tribunal. This, if it is what you are suggesting, is silly. It would completely disfranchise players.

The problem is they want everyone to see the same thing and vote on the total, And there is no real way to decide which cases are automatically excusable. However yeah, I feel like the sheer amount of cases waters down the decision.

What i meant is that for each case there should be lets say 3 reports. Because if ur toxic in 1/5 reports, u will be pardoned(see link). But if you are toxic in 1/1 or 1/2 reports u would most likely be banned. If you break the code u should be punished. But when u see the player was actually ok and just got "false reported" for most of the case u are more inclined to pardon. Again see case.

I'm surprised more people can't wrap their heads around this.

ps- the word consistency means that from case to case there should be X amount of reports. Im not sure how u got the idea that i wanted a minimum from my post. Let's try to not twist words here

Everyone has bad games- you shouldn't be banned for being toxic once. if you're an otherwise neutral/positive force and have a game where you're toxic (not excessively so), you shouldn't be banned for that.

The system isn't perfect. but riot keeps it in because they don't want to pay their own staff to actually go over cases themselves. They'd rather just have anonymous players do it so they can hold out their hands for imaginary rating numbers and a pat on the back from Riot. That costs them nothing.

I think this is the first time I have seen a good judgment on cases like this, and think you are the problem with the tribunal.

I was furious when I got ban'd for one poor game out of 5. I over reacted once to another player clearly breaking the summoner code and having no on one my team stick up for me. I want to just move on to another game and get rid of the toxic team. Instead I was harassed the whole game and when I overreacted and fed the other team so that it would end more quickly and tried to surrender, I got banned. ONLY game I ever intentionally fed and quite honestly, if I was in the same situation I would do it again. Those players never get banned for refusing to play by META even though it is like the first section of the sum code and they don't deserve to win a single game.

I probably won't again because I did not enjoy my ban and I would hate to get perma banned after the 2 seasons of playing nicely and contributing probably close to 100$ to support updates and a better game. (ALSO! who can resist a new teemo skin!! LOL)