Personally, the only way i would like this idea is if it just added more IP to players with good rating and left everything else alone.

Yes, a down-rated troll getting little IP is excellent, but it's not excellent to have elitists downvoting newer players. Newer/less-skilled players need the IP so they can purchase different champs and explore the roles or to purchase runes and try different rune page builds. By limiting their IP, all you are doing is creating a group of players that are not skilled, and much slower at learning, players who will hit level 30 without enough IP to even get a few champs or a single full rune page. I really wouldn't want to go on ranked and get a bunch of less-skilled players who only have an ad carry with a half-full rune page in my team.

If that's not done, then i'm full ok with this idea. Nothing wrong at all with bonus IP for players that did very good. I get the feeling support players will rarely see this bonus, but not a bad idea at all.

You have some good points. At least some of them.

I was just reviewing Riot's "The Tribunal Totally Works!" post here:

http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/....php?t=1626181

Far be it from me to suggest some conspiracy theory, but I'm doubtful of the touted success. No, I don't think they're providing false statistics. I simply think that, regardless of what the Tribunal is actually accomplishing, they're going to come out and announce success and provide a few statistics which might justify that stance. It's propaganda.

I would like to make a few comments on these statistics.

1.4% of all players have been punished by The Tribunal.
In your experience playing this game, are only 1.4% of players worthy of some form of punishment? That means you only encounter one person (from either team) who negatively impacts your gameplay experience once out of every eight matches (Classic Mode). Is that an accurate representation?

Over 50% of all punished players never reoffend.
That is, they never reoffend to the point of being found "guilty" in another tribunal case. So any offense less than another Tribunal case is acceptable? Moreover, this only means they haven't reoffended yet--not at the time the statistics were gathered.

94% of players who receive enough reports to face the tribunal are punished by their peers.
That's nearly unanimous! So a case only reaches The Tribunal when it's so obviously worthy of punishment that nearly every case is voted the same? Or is the issue that people who weren't involved in the match don't give a hoot about it, and they find that spamming "Punish" is more likely to match others' votes, yielding an IP reward? Anyone see a problem with uninterested and biased jury members?

I do not believe The Tribunal is doing much for us. I think it is doing more for Riot--acting as a shield from accusations that they aren't doing anything to improve the atmosphere.

I previoiusly (see first post) stated that an issue with The Tribunal is that it is a hollow threat. The case may rather be that it could be a good system, but that it is being misapplied.

The Tribunal could be a great system for executing extreme punishment--suspensions or even bans. But it is not a great system for encouraging day-to-day civility among the general populace. If it only caps off very excessive harrassment, it makes the statement that anything less than that is acceptable.

It's like training a dog with an axe. You simply observe and tolerate bad behavior without any intervention, up to a point. If the behavior becomes bad enough, you drop the axe. Dead dog. That's not a reform system. That's not a system of encouraging good behavior. It's a system of discouraging only extremes.

Instead, you should spray the dog in the face with water or kick him in the rear for minor offenses. And you reward him with treats for simple acts of good behavior. That's how you convey what's expected. That's how you produce positive influence, little by little, action by action, or game by game.

This seems like a good idea for normal games. I'd really like to see the thumbs up / thumbs down be implemented for ranked games to improve / hurt elo also. The trolls, and the guys who say "Sorry, I'm drunk", and the guy who picks the second ad ranged... etc. These are not 'reportable' but they really should be factored into a ranked elo - as judged by your peers. This is what is most frustrating about the game even into the 1400s.

I agree with most of this
except for one thing that could happen
For example lets say I play a game, do good but everyone on my team do terrible and are all in some premade. Obviously most of the community here would probably just blame it on me because they are with people that arent gonna downvote each other, so even if i did good and helped the team out I would still get very low Ip and the rest go with alot
Also another thing if you are in a 5 premade you can just all upvote each other and get double the ip from the game even if you do horrible

Why can't I upvote more than once? ... :<

Brilliantly executed plan, sir. Brilliant.

Now that I've changed my recommendation for arranged teams to not rate others, it might be better to SHOW who gave what ratings. That way, players can see how their actions and treatment of others DIRECTLY affect their IP gain. It could make this sytem much more effective.

I've edited my first post to reflect this.

Old recommendation: