Originally Posted by Amg iTz Alex

it does help, and in my opinion when people such as you "judge" the cases I can see the tribunal being a wonderful idea, however their can only be so many people that judge properly opposed to the people who do not. My problem isn't necessarily with the tribunal, but with the people who use it.

Originally Posted by Amg iTz Alex

You are living evidence yourself.

Originally Posted by Amg iTz Alex

ok, I won't deny the fact that I'm an ass, I'm an honest person and I don't hold anything back when I speak(type in these instances) and I tend to brag on when I feel accomplished after doing something, however who doesn't? if you are simply going off banning anyone who says a cocky retort then I fail to see the significance of these or of competition.

btw I appreciate you reading things and not jumping to conclusions or posting ignorant statements that derive from a lack of understanding.

Originally Posted by Kinvaras666

Theoretical numbers have no values, so please refrain from using them as argument.

The tribunal is "fair and just to everyone" in the sense that everyone get a chance to be voted on their games, and if a punishment happens by mistake on someone undeserving, it will be reverted.

It never said or meant that people can abuse other people if "they started it", in fact, it says quite the contrary, as you can read in the tribunal guidelines. (I would quote, but you wouldn't take it as proof anyway so, not wasting my time)

Besides, you are confusing what "one sided" means.
On your point of view, "one sided" means that a verdict cannot be given fairly, unless all the chat, related or not, is taken into account.

As I tried to explain, that is not always the case, as some behaviors are inexcusable, thus, the chat from other people is irrelevant.


However, you are trying to imply that "one sided" means "unfair", in a sense that it punishes people without giving them a chance.
And as such, I fail to see your reasoning, if you have any.


Besides the fact, you made your thread to ask a question about the tribunal, while trying to shove in people's face that "[you] know it was deserved"


If that is so, then what is the point on blindlessly trying to accuse the tribunal and its members, with made up numbers, AFTER your question been answered?

Originally Posted by Amg iTz Alex

Again another person who can't understand the things said in this thread or who is simply lazy and refuses to read the ENTIRE thread, so what you have just stated in your 3 lines is that you suffer from ignorance.

Originally Posted by RockLobster88

The problem is, they weren't all cocky retorts. That one statement, that I had to search for, was a cocky retort. What you were pulling was actual harassment. Banter between teams is why we have the All Chat feature, but you abuse that feature with over-the-line trash talk and being an ass in general. You can do a bit of trash talk, I don't mind that. I've partaken in it a few times. However, to the extent that you do it, that is truly toxic and behavior that we are trying to filter out to make the game better for everyone.

I'm glad that you admit that you're willing to give in to the idea that your behavior is unacceptable. Admission is the first step towards improvement. Please note: We don't want you permabanned. That is a last step for everyone in the game. However, if you're unwilling to conform and actually be a better person than you are now, that is the next step, no matter how much time or money you've put into LoL. We don't want that. We want to help you get better.

Originally Posted by Amg iTz Alex

Something can not be fair and just if it is abused by the people using it, as people have admitted to before

Originally Posted by Amg iTz Alex

and the question has now turned into a debate if you couldn't have understood this

Originally Posted by kaleb bartlett

you say the problem with the tribunal is the people, and yet the tribunal has a 95% accuracy rate (according to riot). If it was the people it would be much much lower, so i don't see how you have any basis for your accusations.

The only thing i see is someone who got suspended and is mad they didn't fall into that other 5%

Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo

What evidence do you have that people are

a) Abusing the system.
b) Getting away with it.
c) Actually effecting outcomes.



I could, as an individual, spam punish all day. But if all of the outcomes of the cases are all still accurate, then the Tribunal isn't broken.

If the outcomes are all still accurate it's either because:

a) My abuse of the system is a strong minority and not effecting the outcome.
b) The system has a built-in method for dealing with voters who are abusing the system.



The point is, if the end result is still accurate (which you're strongly failing to disprove right now), then how is the system broken?