I got a 2 week ban. Out of 6 of the games, 2 of them deserved punishment, as I was clearly out of line. However, games 2, 3, 4 and 5 are complete mockeries, and it completely assures me that absolutely no one reads the cases.

Case 3 is my favorite though. I got reported by the enemy team Katarina (I don't have all chat enabled, so I never said a word). In the chat logs, you can see shes talking to her self in all chat, raging about everyone on my team. I was playing Volibear, and she insulted me several times, specifically after I kept q'ing her off her ult. Again, no all chat, so I didn't see her text. The game ended, we won, and I finished off with a fed kda. Out of clear frustration, she reported me (and probably the rest of my team). now here you'd say, no big deal. no way you'l be punished for an obvious mad troll. Nope. I got punished.

tl;dr one of my tribunal cases was me being reported by a mad enemy team Kat, who raged in all chat all game and reported my entire team for losing. we never replied to her rage(my all chat is turned off), and i got banned anyway. this clearly shows that people dont read cases, and just blindly punish

Katarina [All] [00:37:18] nah im reporting
Katarina [All] [00:37:20] bg
Katarina [All] [00:37:23] team sucks

Sure you can, at least in the U.S.A., and for good reason.


And maybe he assumes the same about you (IE: Your moral compass might be out of alignment if you think trash talking isn't "glorious")?

Yeah, we can use the ignore button, but, it doesn't solve issues, as, not communicating is also a reportable/bannable offense...

Troll: You suck ~player~ noob
Troll: Why did I get stuck with this noob, damnit??

Now, the player can decide to respond to the troll, or not.

player: insults ~Troll~ back, argument ensues.
the player can now be reported for responding to the troll (albeit, in an unfriendly manner, as the troll was doing to him/her in the first place)

player ignores troll

Troll: please report ~player~ he won't communicate with his team~

Punishments are not set by Tribunal Judges, they are set by Riot, so in that I will agree that Riot sets the stage.

As for fair reports, I believe that we can do that well enough ourselves. Right now there is not much we can do about unfair reports, and I agree that Riot needs to implement some process to fix this problem. However, we have to accept what we have at the moment and do our part.

The problem with your particular solution is, how do we determine which reports were unfair?

Those who rub people the wrong way very very very disproportionately consistently make it into the Tribunal. It's really as simple as that.

It's not even necessarily that they are doing anything terrible specifically, but if they are just consistently unpleasant to be around, they are probably going to be reported into the Tribunal. This is a social game, so quite frankly, if people find you very very very consistently unpleasant, then you deserve exclusion for the health of the game.

People who are told by the vast majority that their behaviors make them unpleasant to be around but won't stop behaving that way because their behaviors "aren't that bad" are exactly the right kinds of people to ban. They are the exact kind of people who are very very consistently unpleasant to be around.

There is a difference between "thought police" and trying to instil values that they deem moral. At the end of the day, this is Riot's game and they are going to work hard to make the community into whatever they want. If Riot believes that you are impolite and they don't want you here, they have the power to remove you. If Riot wants a courteous community, then they are going to try to make that happen.

I think Riot has done a great job with this process. Our community is very involved in its own construction. They let us police ourselves to some extent, give us rewards for acting how they wish us to act, and allow us to bring grievances to them on these forums. It's up to us to use these options they have given us.

I mained Twitch for like two months before his rework, too. I also built Warmog on him as first item at the time, but I was not an unpleasant player to be around.

I personally believe this is not true. If you don't like the 2 (or 3) candidates available on the ballot, well that is what the Write-In is for. After you Write-In your own choice, then you have every right to complain. Until then, you aren't doing anything to help.

But let's not turn this into politics...


I most definitely would hope he thinks that. Otherwise he is just saying all this to cause strife! Like I said before, since we have disagreements on what we think is right, it's up to the whole community (and Riot) to tell us.

If the player says something along the lines of "Sorry, I'll try and do better/I'm trying my best/Yes that was my mistake" or even "Look, I'm not trying to lose this game, I'm playing it just like you" then that player has clearly tried to communicate with his teammate. If said teammate continues to insult him, then ignoring him is perfectly reasonable and I would wager he will NEVER be banned for "not communicating." Most likely he will never even make it to the Tribunal.

That wasn't really the point I was making. I'm saying Riot has to take the lead on setting a tone for how the community perceives "punishable behavior", and especially in evaluating the veracity of tribunal judges' verdicts against that standard.

The idea has been put forward many times, not just by me, that some kind of "poison pill" tribunal cases, cases that are clearly "pardon"s with absolutely no wrongdoing which - if a judge "punishes" them - would result in losing the ability to do tribunal for some amount of time, would go a long way toward reassuring the community that Riot considers false punishment to be a real problem.

How many times have you heard, in this thread alone even, that there is a presumption of guilt just because someone ended up in tribunal? Riot can break down these prejudices by implementing systems which encourage honest and accountable tribunal verdicts. Then, extend this "poison pill" idea to less clear-cut cases, and seed the community with Riot's standards through evaluating judges on an individual basis against cases designed to test those standards.

The problem with "justice rating" and such is that it is only evaluating your conformity to the herd, a herd which by almost any account tends to overwhelmingly "punish." Riot can guide this by giving individual feedback against test cases, and using those to establish the standards, again, preferably by restricting participation to users who have demonstrated judgment in line with what Riot wants to see.

Lyte is a smart dude, I'm sure this makes sense to him. Why nothing like this has been done I don't know. Maybe development resource constraints. But I sincerely hope they recognize there are serious problems with the Tribunal as-is, today.

Except, the popular vote doesn't matter, and isn't what decides the presidency. The electorate does. So even if I wrote that candidate in, and even if the majority of other americans did, it wouldn't matter if he didn't get the electorate vote.



And what happens when he does make it to the tribunal, and the tribunal punishes him? Would that not be an issue then? As, it is possible (and has happened).

At that point, you would have two options:

- to post your cases on the forums and get a Rioter to comment on them.

or

- make a new account

Of course I would suggest doing the first, as if you truly believe you were improperly punished then you have the right to voice it.

However, those cases are extremely rare (I only know of 1), and will get sorted out if they are honest. I feel like most people assume that their cases are of the type above, but in actuality they are not.

The system is not perfect and never will be, but that doesn't mean it is a horrible system.