this tribunal is **** u know piece of ****

rage = tribunal is working

Sounds like a dispute right der

Sorry to hear you are frustrated. Bans resolve at a time which is both a date and a time of day, usually some number of days after the ban is issued.

Getting banned by the tribunal is QUITE difficult. You need to first make it into the tribunal, which requires that you were reported a lot, and then you have to be voted guilty, which requires that your fellow gamers considered you quite guilty -- our standard for guilt IS a super-majority of your peers who you play with every day. In general, we feel that the juries are too lenient and a lot of the 'borderline' cases that get tossed as not guilty are actually quite guilty... But we've left this up to the community to determine how harsh they want the review process to be.

We think we are very fair with this given all that. That being said, I hope your ban resolves soon, and that you enjoy LoL and don't find you have another encounter with the tribunal. If you are a consistently positive influence on your team, it's very unlikely that you'd end up in it again.

0-5-3, 81 CS, 81k dmg done, in that "probable feeding game". It helps to look at other stats rather than the ignorant tards that look for flat out Kills and Deaths and go by that.

Wait wait wait wait....

Wait...

Just Wait...

Riot thinks too many people are pardoning?

My world, its upside-down, left is right, wet is dry, light is dark. The trolls tell me people only auto punish, so it must be true, but riot thinks its auto pardon!

Madness?!?! This is TRIBUNAL!

Edited to extract what's vital in my eyes.

Making it to the Tribunal can be a piece of cake if the super-majority of our peers don't give a flying [insert generic curse word here] about each other. Thus, this standard may be dangerously flawed.

You said you feel our juries are "too lenient", which implies that there're far more pardons than punishes. Care to provide some proof of that? Otherwise, it'll remain open to skepticism.

So in essence what you're telling us is, based on a majority vote [which I know an automated script can check], players can get banned? So if the players decided to vote "punish" on all cases, ignoring standards set in stone by you guys, players will be awarded punishment? Or if players are extremely sensitive to all violations of the summoner's code [i.e.: punishing players for saying "noob" or "{insert curse words here}"], they can get away with forcing bans on their peers for the most minor offenses?

I personally believe that, given the way all the facts are panning out in my view, there's a lot of room for abuse. Even if someone does indeed deserve to be punished, I feel that the current system is both harsh and demoralizing. It's a negative reinforcement that I feel is going to cause a decline in overall activity in the near future. Nobody wants their account to get "defecated on" by grudge-filled players. Nobody. I firmly believe that venting/communicating someone's anger is a means for venting. I also firmly believe that BOTH the chat filter AND the /ignore command is more than sufficient to eliminate and completely negate the effects of poor "chatting" demeanor.

I feel that the player base just cannot be trusted [period]. The Tribunal's essentially giving power to the internet trolls that happen to play LoL.

The post above reminds me of a question I had. The majority of the post is null since he clearly states: you present your case, but I chose to ignore it until you present evidence that agrees with the opinions I have already formed.

But it brings up the ambiguity of some rules question I have had a while. There are some things that are hard to judge, for example, verbal abuse and spamming. When can I call something spamming? There have been several cases where someone would do something like say noob on 10 lines to every one line of chat from someone else, or other minor insults or general pointless chatter. To me, I would at least want them warned and punished if it persisted, but I feel like I am over reacting by punishing when everything they said, individually, is pretty tame.

Or verbal abuse, the rule of thumb I have been following is, if there is no slur against race, ***, orientation, or other extremely vulgar language, I pardon. However there have been many times where, personally, I would have reported them, and I really want to punish, because the person constantly insults and berates the other players with a stream of relatively (compared to racial slurs) minor insults. Calling someone an idiot noob for 30 minutes really grinds my gears.

Is the accepted rule on that, if they are having an overall negative impact on the gaming experience, punish? Just vote how we as a person would react to being in the game with them? Strict interpretation of the rules, no slurs no foul? What do?

If this is true, why do I see so many Tribunal cases to vote on in which the person only has 1-3 games they were reported for? And why do those single game cases sometimes only have 2 or 3 reports against the accused? And why sometimes are those 3 game cases all games that have only a single report against the accused? 3 reports does not equal "a lot" of reports.

I don't think Zileas is lying, but as I said in another thread, I think a formal newsletter or something like that with legitimate Tribunal statistics is in order. You look at this board and at least 80% of the threads are saying exactly the same thing: Tribunal be trollin'.