The Tribunal

[gamhacked]

Let's put it this way: 40% of your games are apparently 'toxic'*. That's the result we get from this Tribunal case. In a player that's possibly played over 1k games, that's 400 games that were ruined through abhorrent behaviour.

Right, because we all know these 5 games are all I played during my month in between bans.

[Repefe]

These "proofs" ... are cracking me up.

---------- Post added 2012-12-13 at 01:34 PM ----------

Punished for what?

Go ahead and give me a good, true reason I should have been punished in game one.

Edit: You're lucky I don't have omnipotent powers or I'd implode your brain for saying "Typical toxic behavior". God that term is so stupid.

Ok ... here is the concept. Try to grasp it. You should get punish if at least in one of the games you show toxic behavior. One ... not all.

[JimPaladin]

Okay here's the concept, try to grasp it, I SPECIFICALLY said "It does NOT MATTER if in the OTHER GAMES I should have been punished, the FIRST GAME PROVES RIOT/THE TRIBUNAL WILL PUNISH YOU WITH TIME BANS TIME BANS FOR DOING NOTHING WRONG."

Oh my fucking God the illiteracy/refusal to read correctly on this forum drives me b@n@n@z.

edit: lots of typos oh my god

[Rampant Rabbit]

Edit: You're lucky I don't have omnipotent powers or I'd implode your brain for saying "Typical toxic behavior". God that term is so stupid.

Get. Over. It. Mannnnnnnnn.

---------- Post added 2012-12-13 at 01:47 PM ----------

Okay here's the concept, try to grasp it, I SPECIFICALLY said "It does NOT MATTER if in the OTHER GAMES I should have been punished, the FIRST GAME PROVES RIOT/THE TRIBUNAL WILL PUNISH YOU WITH TIME BANS TIME BANS FOR DOING NOTHING WRONG."

Oh my fucking God the illiteracy/refusal to read correctly on this forum drives me b@n@n@z.

edit: lots of typos oh my god

You just don't seem to have the ability to grasp the way these cases work. We've explained it plenty of times in several ways.

Don't look weird at us if you still don't fucking get it.

---------- Post added 2012-12-13 at 01:48 PM ----------

Right, because we all know these 5 games are all I played during my month in between bans.

40% of your games that are involved with your Tribunal case. Seriously dude.

[gamhacked]

40% of your games that are involved with your Tribunal case. Seriously dude.

This human said:

Let's put it this way: 40% of your games are apparently 'toxic'*. That's the result we get from this Tribunal case. In a player that's possibly played over 1k games, that's 400 games that were ruined through abhorrent behaviour.

He is assuming this is the breakdown of all the games I play. Quite the assumption, isn't it?

I admitted that two of those games were on me. Do you really think I would be starting this discussion if I really thought my behavior to be that bad in as many as 40% of my games?

[Rampant Rabbit]

It's a hypothesis based on your Tribunal case.

It doesn't have to be right or wrong from the start. It's a rough estimation. One that I wouldn't challenge so quickly if I were you.

I'll admit that I've acted like a dick in probably 20-40% of my games played. I just know how to do it without getting to deal with the repercussions of it.

---------- Post added 2012-12-13 at 02:36 PM ----------

Just to make it very clear to those that feel that they are being treated unfair in the Tribunal because of undeserved reports being in their case.

This is why the pardon button exists. Not everything that ends up in the Tribunal has to be a bannable offense. It can also just be some asshole that just doesn't like your face. If this is the case, then a pardon shall be given.

[Repefe]

This is my point as well. If I would indeed have been banned only on account of those 2 sour games, why are those other games there at all? I concur that it suggests that the fine people of the Tribunal would ban at the drop of a disagreeable hat. In fact, I think that is their prime motive: to ban anyone diverging in the slightest from their perceived notions of in-game etiquette.

I am still not sure you guys understand how it works. You get reported a few times across small sample of games. That's what triggers a tribunal case. All the games you were reported for are put together and the case is decided based on all of them. In in ANY of those games you misbehaved, you should get punished. But just because there are 4-5 games in the case does not mean you get punished for behavior in each and every one of them. The system expects there will be false reports. Thats why you appear before tribunal only after being reported several times across small number of games. The point of the tribunal is to go through those games and if they find ONE where you misbehaved, they should mark you for punish.

It looks like you would like the tribunal to mark specifically the games and chat lines you were banned for or something.

[Omnoms]

Out of sheer curiosity, how DO you find your cases? Aren't they deliberately meant to be kept hidden?

[Rampant Rabbit]

Out of sheer curiosity, how DO you find your cases? Aren't they deliberately meant to be kept hidden?

I believe the link to the case is sent to you by e-mail.

[Deleted]

"It does not matter that in all other cases I should have been punished, if in one of them I am innocent it means I got punished for nothing"


HOLY FUCK. How, how, how, how HOW stupid a person has to be to see this that way. It does NOT matter if you were innocent in 99 out of 100 of games you were reported in. Yes, people report for nothing, big news. I've been reported for going 1/3/1 in mid or for not warding the mid lane as support. HOWEVER this is not what you get banned for(at least I never got banned for it. Magic?). Those are just reports that got in the tribunal case despite being baseless, and those are the vast majority. However, it's that one game in which you spammed "noob", told your team to go fuck themselves and yelled more profanity than a 15 year old showing off to friends is what you got punished for, and rightfully so. Do you figure you ramp up some positive karma while acting acceptably that eventually allows you to just go batshit once in a while and destroy someone's game by being a toxic asshole? It does not work that way.

[gamhacked]

I am still not sure you guys understand how it works. You get reported a few times across small sample of games. That's what triggers a tribunal case. All the games you were reported for are put together and the case is decided based on all of them. In in ANY of those games you misbehaved, you should get punished. But just because there are 4-5 games in the case does not mean you get punished for behavior in each and every one of them. The system expects there will be false reports. Thats why you appear before tribunal only after being reported several times across small number of games. The point of the tribunal is to go through those games and if they find ONE where you misbehaved, they should mark you for punish.

It looks like you would like the tribunal to mark specifically the games and chat lines you were banned for or something.

If you're saying I may have been pardoned for 3 of those games, but not for the other 2, what the hell is the point of it all? How does it make sense that I be banned when only (hypothetically) 2 out 5 games were punishable? Is there no counterweight in the 3 furshlugginer pardons I (hypothetically) received?

Unless, of course, I wasn't pardoned in one or more of those 3 cases in which my remarks we, the fine people of the MMO-Champion discussion boards, agree were more innocuous than toxic, in which case you'll agree the Tribunal erred in its ruling.

[Sinndra]

i think you are way to worried about your behavior. i participate in Tribunals almost daily. i love the game, but cant stand poor sportsman like conduct. but, that doesnt mean just because the case is there, that i automatically vote to punish. ive seen plenty of cases with little to no proof of the offense they were reported for, im fair, i hit pardon. i like to have a high success rating. it doesnt serve me any good to just punish, punish, punish.

but yah, dont act like a prick and you have nothing to worry about.. even if you have a bad day.. and things slip, so long as its not habitual you wont get perma banned. unless you go totally bat-shit crazy on somebody. but i think even you could agree if you did.. you should be banned. if you lash out a tiny bit, you might get a few days cooling off vacation. be proactive vent your frustration on the forums here (ever had a bad game...) is a good place. instead of going off on the person in game.

[Deleted]

So then, out of say, the 5 games cited, how many must you be punished for for a punishment to be carried out?

If you're saying I may have been pardoned for 3 of those games, but not for the other 2, what the hell is the point of it all? How does it make sense that I be banned when only (hypothetically) 2 out 5 games were punishable? Is there no counterweight in the 3 furshlugginer pardons I (hypothetically) received?

Unless, of course, I wasn't pardoned in one or more of those 3 cases in which my remarks we, the fine people of the MMO-Champion discussion boards, agree were more innocuous than toxic, in which case you'll agree the Tribunal erred in its ruling.

Proven, you never even entered tribunal nor do you understand how it works despite our best efforts, and regardless of that ignorance you feel entitled to judge the integrity of tribunal system. Oh, the internetz.

Those 5 games are an entirety of one case. Your judgement is not carried out one game at a time, in a tribunal case you get anywhere between 2 and 5(6?) games and you judge them all at once. You do not press punish/pardon one game at a time, you get a variety of games to look at and you punish or pardon based on the actions in all of them. Let's say 3 of the reports were for nothing, that does not change the fact that 2 of them were justified, and it's for those 2 the case has been punished.

[Deleted]

Has he been banned from the forum for this?

[Rampant Rabbit]

If you're saying I may have been pardoned for 3 of those games, but not for the other 2, what the hell is the point of it all? How does it make sense that I be banned when only (hypothetically) 2 out 5 games were punishable? Is there no counterweight in the 3 furshlugginer pardons I (hypothetically) received?

Unless, of course, I wasn't pardoned in one or more of those 3 cases in which my remarks we, the fine people of the MMO-Champion discussion boards, agree were more innocuous than toxic, in which case you'll agree the Tribunal erred in its ruling.

Toxic behavior can range from light to very strong toxic behavior. This is the same in real life.

Maybe this will help you understand:

[Dundebuns]

Childish to be sure, but to me reporting someone for saying 'gg easy' is waaaay more childish.

Reporting someone for 'gg easy' is exactly what the Summoners code demands.

[gamhacked]

Proven, you never even entered tribunal nor do you understand how it works despite our best efforts, and regardless of that ignorance you feel entitled to judge the integrity of tribunal system. Oh, the internetz.

Those 5 games are an entirety of one case. Your judgement is not carried out one game at a time, in a tribunal case you get anywhere between 2 and 5(6?) games and you judge them all at once. You do not press punish/pardon one game at a time, you get a variety of games to look at and you punish or pardon based on the actions in all of them. Let's say 3 of the reports were for nothing, that does not change the fact that 2 of them were justified, and it's for those 2 the case has been punished.

Yes, I slipped there and I removed it, not swiftly enough for your fingers, it seems.

I have, in fact, ventured in there once or twice, and I remember how it works, because you jolted my memory.

That said, my point stands. I was punished based on 5 cases, 3 of which we agree weren't individually punishable (even though the punishment is based on the 5 cases collectively, not individually). If I were deciding on what to do with someone, I'd weigh the true accusations (the bad cases) against the false accusations (the cases we agree were wrongly reported). Since 3 outweighs 2, I'd pardon.

If not so, how does a Tribune think?

[Rampant Rabbit]

Yes, I slipped there and I removed it, not swiftly enough for your fingers, it seems.

I have, in fact, ventured in there once or twice, and I remember how it works, because you jolted my memory.

That said, my point stands. I was punished based on 5 cases, 3 of which we agree weren't individually punishable (even though the punishment is based on the 5 cases collectively, not individually). If I were deciding on what to do with someone, I'd weigh the true accusations (the bad cases) against the false accusations (the cases we agree were wrongly reported). Since 3 outweighs 2, I'd pardon.

If not so, how does a Tribune think?

And those games where the reviewers saw you showed toxic behavior clearly outweighed your non-toxic behavior in the cases where you did not deserve a report.

What's not to get really?

[FrenchieKDC]

It's really simple and it's something I, eventually, learned - ignore them. I mean it. Go into the scoreboard and hit mute. As soon as I feel like someone is going to be a problem in chat, I mute them.

Yes, I slipped there and I removed it, not swiftly enough for your fingers, it seems.

I have, in fact, ventured in there once or twice, and I remember how it works, because you jolted my memory.

That said, my point stands. I was punished based on 5 cases, 3 of which we agree weren't individually punishable (even though the punishment is based on the 5 cases collectively, not individually). If I were deciding on what to do with someone, I'd weigh the true accusations (the bad cases) against the false accusations (the cases we agree were wrongly reported). Since 3 outweighs 2, I'd pardon.

If not so, how does a Tribune think?

How I use the Tribunal: Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. I give you the benefit of the doubt. As soon as I see anything remotely bad, I'm going to punish. But I continue looking at the other reports/cases so that I can, with full confidence, punish, or switch to pardon. 99% of cases still end up in punishes for me, and I have not been wrong in so many cases (long streak).

[Sinndra]

Yes, I slipped there and I removed it, not swiftly enough for your fingers, it seems.

I have, in fact, ventured in there once or twice, and I remember how it works, because you jolted my memory.

That said, my point stands. I was punished based on 5 cases, 3 of which we agree weren't individually punishable (even though the punishment is based on the 5 cases collectively, not individually). If I were deciding on what to do with someone, I'd weigh the true accusations (the bad cases) against the false accusations (the cases we agree were wrongly reported). Since 3 outweighs 2, I'd pardon.

If not so, how does a Tribune think?

i agree that having to punish or pardon a whole group of matches isnt the best way, i really wish i could vote based on each individual case. i also wish i could see the chat that happens in the lobby after a match. but no, i dont vote based on the majority. i might be wrong here, but if you have been reported for 4 matches, that i cant find anything wrong in, and one match that i can find all sorts of bad behavior.. yah im clicking punish. your 4 other matches dont mean anything to me. since there are holes in the proof like i said.. you coulda been a jerk after the game.