That's the point. Everyone is raging about almost everything and anything. Especially if you're losing or if someone is new, etc. I'm not saying, "it's OK because everyone is doing," I'm saying more, "it is what it is." A rock is a rock. You can't change it. Such is the internet. You can either fight the flow or steer it. From my experience, Riot's "fight" is flawed.

You also have to remember, that it's based on limited data. Most of the time people are reporting players because they have a bad game. Everyone has a bad game now and then. Should they get a ban for it?

Example. A 13 wants IP, goes on the Tribunal reads the first few lines of the chat log and says guilty. Can a 13 year old be a judge? Does he even know how the game is played and what's being said or what a player is raging over? Does a 13 year old even know right from wrong?

To be able to record every game that takes place on their servers they would need extra servers as large as YouTube.

I'm saying they can avoid all those troubles all together.

I forgot to mention; the MVP of a team gets extra IP.

Yes, I think the Tribunal is effective.

For all of its flaws and problems, when I look at Tribunal punish cases under the new system, I usually think "That guy made that game worse for his teammates" and I know that he is either getting being guided towards changing his behavior or moving down the line to a permaban.

Is there another system that could be more effective? Probably. Is RIOT looking for it? Yes. Will they find it? I don't know.

Effective

Some protection is better than none.
It save a lot of time and money for Riot as well allowing a decent protection measures.

I personally think some people are too lenient in the Tribunal. I'll see some people get pardoned that should have been punished. I don't see a lot of innocents get punished, though.

I think the problem with having an MVP in a game and no punishment whatsoever, is basically that you can still be a jerk and nothing will ever come of it except that you won't get extra IP at the end of a game. To be honest, I probably wouldn't even use it and I'm not sure a lot of other people would use it because most people just leave after the game and skip the chat.

I also have to say that what is trivial to some might not be trivial to other people. I don't like racist or homophobic remarks at all, some people might consider that a trivial matter if someone calls someone a slur a few times in a game, to me, I don't see it that way.

Honestly, Riot has already told us that the players are a lot less bloodthirsty than we think, and I agree. People are more often ready to pardon someone than they are to punish, we look for ways to pardon someone who might not deserve it because it seems like most people don't want to be put into that sort of situation and as human beings, I think we try to see ourselves in that person's shoes.

Riot has also told us that a very small amount of people are punished and an even smaller portion are banned. I'm also sure that most people that reach the tribunal have done something to deserve being there, whether trivial or not. I guess what everyone wants is for Riot to slowly go through all the cases again and just punish people a lot harder than we do.

Nothing is perfect, but I do believe the tribunal is doing a good enough job, as it is. How else are they going to actually discourage people from being jerks. If you were going to break the law anyway, there's nothing to stop you from doing it, but they can make it harder for you to continue. If you know the rules and don't want to get banned, you'll change your attitude. It's also not like everyone polaying the game can vote. I believe only level 30 summoners are able to, which should mean that you had to work your way up and not get banned getting there.

The point is you can't tell who was really innocent and who was guilty. The only thing you can really judge is verbal abuse through the chat log.

Make it mandatory, etc. An MVP system is just one idea. The point is it makes people want to play more admirably.

I don't either, but lets say someone thinks a mid-laner should leash every time a jungler needs to jungle. The mid-laner disagrees and the jungler decides to report him and also says he has a negative attitude. He is playing with a friend and they both decide to report him. See the flaws? You can believe me, this happens more often than not.

Like I said before, there are certain people who are just nasty and deserve a punishment but honestly, I'm seeing a lot of people being threatened of being reported because their team lost and he/she has the lowest kill/death ratio. Then they get voted to be punished because the voter has no idea the other team was a premade vs a pub.

The only problem is everyone is breaking the rules. Virtually any game, especially losing ones, you are going to get people who complain and start pointing the blame. With hundreds of new players joining and making new accounts, a person coming back after a ban has to keep his mouth shut and take it up the *** from all the new people because he's afraid of getting banned again. In Riot's view, they rule through fear, in my view, ruling through encouraging good behavior would be more effective.

I voted yes

I am at slight odds with your poll since I think that tribunal probably does not encourage people to play positively as much as scare them into playing positively so they do not get banned, HOWEVER, I still consider that the Tribunal being effective.

The whole goal is to get people to stop playing like jerks. I dont care if they are not playing like jerks because the read the code and understand/agree that a postive competitive gaming environment is better for all involved OR if they stop being an ass because they know that the next suspension is a long one or perma ban. I just care that they stop allowing their toxic behavior ruin my games.

Edit: Not saying it stops all toxic behaviors but it catches some and thats a step in the right direction to me.

From what I'm reading your primary arguments are "It's the internet. It's ok because everyone else is doing it.". That's exactly what it is even though you tried to obfuscate that and deny it through stating that it's because "It's the internet, you can't change it." The same logic applies, there is no reason to state that people cannot or should not attempt to reform those who come into their community.

There is also "You don't have enough evidence!" which is simply not true in most cases. The tribunal is at present designed to punish primarily chat related offenses. It has almost all the evidence that it needs for this in most cases, and hopefully they add pre and post game chat logs as well but for the moment you can usually tell if a person is verbally abusing another person and use your own common sense to determine if what was stated in the match was justified. As stated earlier in the thread, just because you can't see matches where they behaved does not make their actions acceptable. When you verbally harass another it doesn't matter how many games you played, you still broke the rules and you still deserve punishment. Yes, people snap but that doesn't make how they vent the anger they have justified or else we could apply this naive logic to any crime ever. The person merely snapped because of external forces so now the punishment does not apply to them. In the game world or out of it, that should be evident as to why it's silly thinking.

There's also the fact that you use hyperbole fairly loosely. "The only problem is everyone is breaking the rules." is hyperbole, especially considering the fact that 98% of players will never even actually see the tribunal, and around 50% of them don't actually speak, the statistics are not in your favor for an argument like that.

You also seem to be advocating that if there is no positive reinforcement that we cannot have negative reinforcement. Yes, there should be a positive reinforcement system but you must balance it carefully or else it will be prone to abuse or not effective enough to be anything of actual value.



I also feel that the tribunal is effective enough in it's purpose as it can be given the present context of the game and the limitations of what it could feasibly do. I believe that it could be improved, and that awareness could be improved so that way more players behave or understand what the tribunal is but I also do not believe that it is in need of enough fixes to describe it as ineffective.

If someone verbally abused someone else they are guilty, no matter what. That's how Riot sees it. Just because one person does it to someone else does not make it right. If the other person was not being helpful in the game and no one else could tell by the chat, then that's unfortunate, but the other person who was being verbally abusive should still be punished.

I would not want to vote for an MVP if I had to. There is no reason I would vote for someone that may have been completely equal to everyone else in game and put them above anyone else. That's how most games are, and if I was forced to vote, I would choose my friends. Reporting is optional, as should be an MVP system if it was put in. Forcing me to choose someone I would never actually choose for any real reason is pointless.

If you can find a large portion of cases where people were unjustly punished and, then you might have a reason to be angry. Premade teams yelling at someone else because they don't like how they played and the other person being a jerk back, still means the other person should be reported, by Riot's terms. The premade should have also been reported, but you don't actually know if they were, so the point is completely moot. You are judging one case and one case only. Not everyone in that group, not the people you want to judge, just that one person give to you in that case.

Not everyone points the blame in chat. Not everyone calls someone a name or tells someone else that they suck or should die, etc.

Riot is treating the tribunal a lot like a judicial system where you are judged by your peers and (in terms of a ban) a judge. Ruling through good behavior is for children, most people playing the game should know what's right and wrong. You are supposed to be 13 years old to play the game. Thirteen means you have the mental capacity to know that telling someone to uninstall because they suck is mean and hurtful.

Fear doesn't necessarily promote good behavior. More like resentment, and frustration. Resentment at Riot that they got banned, and frustration that they can't stand up for themselves if other players begin belittling them. I guarantee Riot will be losing more players if this keeps up, and not just the bad ones.

When was the last game you had where there wasn't someone blaming someone else for a loss and threatening a report? There is always and will always be a negative person in most games. I'm just saying for League of Legends, a free to play game based on players' wills to support the company, do they really want to be banning players or rather, supporting them and rewarding them for good actions?

And how many reasons other than verbal abuse can someone be reported for?

That comment was concerning the COC not the Tribunal.

It may be effective, but it's severely flawed. In the long run, I honestly believe it will only hurt Riot.