Originally Posted by Chick Tossta
So.. whilst traversing across this forum I for- whatever reason- decided to peruse the "Tribunal" section.
It's truly disheartening that there is pretty much the same amount of downvotes for everybody and anybody who decides that they don't agree with the current system. There should never have been a justice system run by the same people who play the game.
Anybody I've seen even attempt to argue against this would-be Mitt Romney of the Tribunal "JohnnyOmega" has been smashed by downvotes and the most straight-backed, uptight, and robotic replies I've ever witnessed. The most common retort has been "^This guy has had a bad vote from the Tribunal therefore his opinion isn't worth reading". High horses, indeed.
First and foremost, you should not PUNISH somebody whom has 1/5 games warranting a PUNISH. This should be common sense. I bet almost everybody who reads these forums have encountered a game where no matter what sort of influence they've tried to place into the game they were in, they were getting a report whether they liked it or not. Personally, I've been reported by somebody for something as inconclusive as a First Blood. From being First Blooded, the individual made the decision that I was "bad", and then rallied the other team through the 'gift' of all-chat into reporting me at the end of the game. Defending myself gets me reported. Not saying anything gets me reported.
Now I'm not saying that there aren't people on the Tribunal that don't deserve a swift slap with a ban hammer. What I am saying (inb4 religious use of all of these kids' downvote button) is that there are people who end up on the Tribunal under false pretenses. I don't remember which thread I was on, but somebody was trying to express how the Internet as a whole is inhabited by a near infinite amount of personalities. There should not be repercussions just because somebody talks a little bit more crude than you're used to. You can't call the cops on somebody who cusses in front of you whilst behind a counter of some sort in the service industry. You shouldn't be allowed to report somebody just because they say "noob" once or twice. Further to this, the threat of a report should be reportable! How do you think that's going to improve their game, when they are now fearing the potential temp ban or permanent ban just because of a mistake they've made?
This system is heavily flawed. The people who ceaselessly defend it display the same characteristics as members of a cult. Only those cult members will mindlessly attack me, because if you are going to allow for a system run by the players, the system itself should also be open to be modified by the players. Which, unfortunately, is not a reality.
If you actually read the original post you would know why punishing for 1 punishable game out of five IS common sense.
If we pardon for it, then although the reported incidents are washed away from future Tribunal cases, they remain in the Riot staff records for manual audits.
We are not shown how many times a player has been pardoned despite having punishable incidents on their cases.
If we irresponsibly pardon players thinking that the punishable incidents on their cases are first time offenses or a similar train of thought, then the punishable incidents can pile up with the player never knowing that his/her behavior in those incidents is unacceptable in the community.
This becomes a snowball effect to the point at which the player piles up enough reported incidents to trigger a flag for manual audit from Riot auditors, who tend to be harsher with their judgements because they can see ALL reported incidents on a case file including the incidents not shown in the cases on the file.
This leads to a suspension all because the community kept granting pardons to the player despite punishable incidents being on the player's cases.
If the initial case had been a punish, then the player would have gotten a warning from the community and had a chance to properly reform, saving both him/herself from suspension and a lot of players that had to play in his/her punishable incidents a lot of grief.
THAT is why the original post IS logical and common sense.
Why pardon (a punishable incident) if it will lead to unnecessary suffering for both the accused and his/her victims?