na.leagueoflegends.com/tribunal/case/5828788/

This was the first case I filled out since the Tribunal was revamped earlier today. I thought it was an obvious case. A player verbally berated his teammates in a way I would never tolerate in-game. More than likely, I'd have muted him way before he finished spewing his hate.

But, upon looking at my Justice Review, I'm now at 0/1 for accuracy and the majority of players actually pardoned him.

If I should be less harsh judging players, how should I look at cases? When it comes to verbal abuse, I always use this general rule of thumb: If it is bad enough that I wouldn't ever want to play with the player again, I vote punish. Occasionally, I'll pardon a player who realistically was just dealing with another annoying player, but this is rare. Most of the time, I stick to the rule of thumb.

I was under the impression that this is how the cases should be judged, and fits perfectly within the Guidelines I agree to each time. Any feedback from other tribunal users or Riot staff is greatly appreciated. If my vote seems too harsh, I want to know so that I can improve my feedback quality to the Tribunal.

I think I'd probably vote punish, especially with how he likes to always report other people, who, judging by the chat, were just bad, rather than intentionally feeding. I think I have the same trouble you do with this kind of case, where they act like a jerk, but they aren't nearly as extreme as the people who get overwhelming majority verdicts.

From what I've read from Lyte's postings, if anything, the Tribunal is on the lenient side, and I think it's cases just like this that lead to it. I want to get a good Justice rating, but I also don't want to have guys like the player in this case as my teammates.

For now, I think I may stick to voting on what I guess is the harsh side of average and see what happens.

It's been stated that many Tribunal voters may look at the first incident in a case instead of reading the others and click Pardon. EDIT: Woohoo! It got fixed!

A number of Tribunal voters may not understand what constitutes a violation of The Summoner's Code, or that they should punish if they see at least one punishable incident.

Falsely pardoned players will often show up again in Tribunal or be flagged for manual audit by Riot staff, in which case they may be manually suspended despite the false pardons.

I would have punished. In all 3 examples in the case the person is being pretty rude and detrimental to other people's enjoyment of the game. Unfortunately with the tribunal being player-driven there's the chance that this kind of behavior becomes the hegemonic norm among it's players (it becomes acceptable). Whether or not this is happening is debatable... but from my own experience I can say it certainly seems so. There's only really two ways it can go: Tribunal users get harsher with punishing... or they get more lenient. I guarantee that either way it swings there will always be controversial cases as such. There's also the fact this is just one case. To get a more accurate reading you'd have to look at a wide variety of cases and in more detail, and subject bias is always going to be a problem too... but that's just my two cents. Take it as you please

I generally punish for "GG Noobs" excessive use of "Noobs" "Scrubs".
And insta punish for derogatory use of ****** << Horrible Insult to Gay People(incase its stars)

I would have pardoned, I've played many competitive online games which has maybe hardened me, so I find this guy's behavior very light (he sees that his team is losing and is whining, very common). Just doesn't bother me at all /shrug