|
Want to rage about your latest loss? Use the QQ thread. If you whine in GD, you'll get warned. ===== + Show Spoiler +If your [Stream] thread was moved to the general TL Stream subforum (aka SC stream land), find your thread and PM it to me and I'll move it back to LoL territory. I can argue with staff that moving a non-SC thread into a SC subforum is just asking for that thread to get buried.
- Neo, Dec. 15 2011, 6:33 KST I have admin approval. I'll be moving LoL streams back to the subforum. Stream name will be based on Summoner name. - Neo 7:07 KST |
On December 21 2011 12:43 Treadmill wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 12:31 iCanada wrote:On December 21 2011 12:29 Ecael wrote:On December 21 2011 12:16 NeoIllusions wrote:
Riot may not be everywhere, but their PR team is top notch. Eh, bullshit. I'd rather see him troll and get away with it because the due process sucks rather than knowing that Rioters will ban at a whim. What the ban reflects to me is not that Riot cares about the playerbase, but that it is willing to hang people randomly to set an example. It might have been a good PR move, but it reflects horribly upon the way things work currently far as I am concerned. There are plenty of shit players who get away with consistently worse behavior than what Saint did one game. Saint was a dick for intentionally fucking the guy over, but getting banned just because some Rioters caught sight of it in action when dozens more troll consistently and are shown in streams, albeit not their own? zzz Exactly. It's not even a good PR move, because suddenly one of your marquee guys is playing your competitors game in front of a couple thousand people isntead of yours. I disagree. I don't see tribunal as 'due process' but as a way to manage the thousands of trolls. If you do shit like that you should get banned. Is anyone saying that what SV did was ok? Also something not being mentioned, really: 10000 people watch sainvicious troll on stream. We are a social animal, we imitate behaviour that we see (conciously or not). A decent number of those 10000 will go on to get in a similar situation and react ot it just as childishly. That's why Riot wants to hold streamers to a higher standard; the worse their behaviour the worse the behaviour of the community at large.
So, instead of having 10000 of your players trolling your games you'd rather have them go play DotA2?
Rofl.
That seems like the opposite of good PR.
|
On December 21 2011 12:46 Craton wrote:
Did mention that.
If SV didn't troll he wouldn't have gotten banned. Moral of the story? Don't troll.
the end
|
He already back streaming on a smurf. No problem.
|
United States37500 Posts
On December 21 2011 12:52 iCanada wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 12:43 Treadmill wrote:On December 21 2011 12:31 iCanada wrote:On December 21 2011 12:29 Ecael wrote:On December 21 2011 12:16 NeoIllusions wrote:
Riot may not be everywhere, but their PR team is top notch. Eh, bullshit. I'd rather see him troll and get away with it because the due process sucks rather than knowing that Rioters will ban at a whim. What the ban reflects to me is not that Riot cares about the playerbase, but that it is willing to hang people randomly to set an example. It might have been a good PR move, but it reflects horribly upon the way things work currently far as I am concerned. There are plenty of shit players who get away with consistently worse behavior than what Saint did one game. Saint was a dick for intentionally fucking the guy over, but getting banned just because some Rioters caught sight of it in action when dozens more troll consistently and are shown in streams, albeit not their own? zzz Exactly. It's not even a good PR move, because suddenly one of your marquee guys is playing your competitors game in front of a couple thousand people isntead of yours. I disagree. I don't see tribunal as 'due process' but as a way to manage the thousands of trolls. If you do shit like that you should get banned. Is anyone saying that what SV did was ok? Also something not being mentioned, really: 10000 people watch sainvicious troll on stream. We are a social animal, we imitate behaviour that we see (conciously or not). A decent number of those 10000 will go on to get in a similar situation and react ot it just as childishly. That's why Riot wants to hold streamers to a higher standard; the worse their behaviour the worse the behaviour of the community at large. So, instead of having 10000 of your players trolling your games you'd rather have them go play DotA2? Rofl. That seems like the opposite of good PR.
Stop using terrible reasoning and hyperbole. Thanks.
Banning saint does not suddenly make 10K players stop trolling LoL games and go off to troll/play DotA2.
If saint decided to play more LoL but on a smurf, would you have any ground to stand on?
If anything, banning a player for trolling behavior is a good PR move. Is Riot supposed to not exact punishment on high elo players out of fear they might switch to DotA2.
Makes. No. Sense.
|
On December 21 2011 12:52 iCanada wrote:
That seems like the opposite of good PR.
PR is not marketing.
|
On December 21 2011 12:52 iCanada wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 12:43 Treadmill wrote:On December 21 2011 12:31 iCanada wrote:On December 21 2011 12:29 Ecael wrote:On December 21 2011 12:16 NeoIllusions wrote:
Riot may not be everywhere, but their PR team is top notch. Eh, bullshit. I'd rather see him troll and get away with it because the due process sucks rather than knowing that Rioters will ban at a whim. What the ban reflects to me is not that Riot cares about the playerbase, but that it is willing to hang people randomly to set an example. It might have been a good PR move, but it reflects horribly upon the way things work currently far as I am concerned. There are plenty of shit players who get away with consistently worse behavior than what Saint did one game. Saint was a dick for intentionally fucking the guy over, but getting banned just because some Rioters caught sight of it in action when dozens more troll consistently and are shown in streams, albeit not their own? zzz Exactly. It's not even a good PR move, because suddenly one of your marquee guys is playing your competitors game in front of a couple thousand people isntead of yours. I disagree. I don't see tribunal as 'due process' but as a way to manage the thousands of trolls. If you do shit like that you should get banned. Is anyone saying that what SV did was ok? Also something not being mentioned, really: 10000 people watch sainvicious troll on stream. We are a social animal, we imitate behaviour that we see (conciously or not). A decent number of those 10000 will go on to get in a similar situation and react ot it just as childishly. That's why Riot wants to hold streamers to a higher standard; the worse their behaviour the worse the behaviour of the community at large. So, instead of having 10000 of your players trolling your games you'd rather have them go play DotA2? Rofl. That seems like the opposite of good PR.
would you rather have 10000 of your players ruining games for other people and driving them away?
|
Honestly... if I was Riot I'd ban any of his smurfs on stream too. That's what TL would do and it seems to work out well. =P
|
On December 21 2011 12:57 starfries wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 12:52 iCanada wrote:On December 21 2011 12:43 Treadmill wrote:On December 21 2011 12:31 iCanada wrote:On December 21 2011 12:29 Ecael wrote:On December 21 2011 12:16 NeoIllusions wrote:
Riot may not be everywhere, but their PR team is top notch. Eh, bullshit. I'd rather see him troll and get away with it because the due process sucks rather than knowing that Rioters will ban at a whim. What the ban reflects to me is not that Riot cares about the playerbase, but that it is willing to hang people randomly to set an example. It might have been a good PR move, but it reflects horribly upon the way things work currently far as I am concerned. There are plenty of shit players who get away with consistently worse behavior than what Saint did one game. Saint was a dick for intentionally fucking the guy over, but getting banned just because some Rioters caught sight of it in action when dozens more troll consistently and are shown in streams, albeit not their own? zzz Exactly. It's not even a good PR move, because suddenly one of your marquee guys is playing your competitors game in front of a couple thousand people isntead of yours. I disagree. I don't see tribunal as 'due process' but as a way to manage the thousands of trolls. If you do shit like that you should get banned. Is anyone saying that what SV did was ok? Also something not being mentioned, really: 10000 people watch sainvicious troll on stream. We are a social animal, we imitate behaviour that we see (conciously or not). A decent number of those 10000 will go on to get in a similar situation and react ot it just as childishly. That's why Riot wants to hold streamers to a higher standard; the worse their behaviour the worse the behaviour of the community at large. So, instead of having 10000 of your players trolling your games you'd rather have them go play DotA2? Rofl. That seems like the opposite of good PR. would you rather have 10000 of your players ruining games for other people and driving them away?
Yeah, um, I would much rather have 10000 people playing a different game rather than griefing mine.
|
SV wasn't trolling, when he jungles he ganks minions all the time, he's just ganking the jungle creeps as a laner now.
|
On December 21 2011 12:48 NeoIllusions wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 12:29 Ecael wrote:On December 21 2011 12:16 NeoIllusions wrote:
Riot may not be everywhere, but their PR team is top notch. Eh, bullshit. I'd rather see him troll and get away with it because the due process sucks rather than knowing that Rioters will ban at a whim. What the ban reflects to me is not that Riot cares about the playerbase, but that it is willing to hang people randomly to set an example. It might have been a good PR move, but it reflects horribly upon the way things work currently far as I am concerned. There are plenty of shit players who get away with consistently worse behavior than what Saint did one game. Saint was a dick for intentionally fucking the guy over, but getting banned just because some Rioters caught sight of it in action when dozens more troll consistently and are shown in streams, albeit not their own? zzz On December 21 2011 12:12 overt wrote:On December 21 2011 12:00 Parnage wrote:
It also weakens the thing they are promoting. "You should use tribunal and report them, but don't worry we'll just ban the guy at first game we see because we happened to be watching" The Tribunal bans no one. It just tells Riot, "these people should be punished." Most tribunal cases end in a warning from Riot and nothing more. It's only repeat offenders who, after being warned, don't correct their behavior that get temp banned. Pendragon just did an AMA on how the Tribunal works on reddit. Basically, all of this talk about it going through the process is irrelevant since Riot has always banned people when they see something ban worthy. They rarely perm ban people. It's a pretty cool methodology of wanting players to just improve their attitude rather than just flat out punish them forever. It's three fuckin' days. Maybe now saint won't tell people, "I'll throw games and make more money than you doing it" or follow people around stealing their CS. And again, it probably wasn't just for one game. He was being a dick to other people earlier today too.Nevermind. He was banned for just that one game. I agree with Riot's reasoning though. Frankly I feel like this promotes bad behavior more than anything else. How much bitching and taunting do you see people do about how the tribunal doesn't work? Fortunately for me, I am not saint and I don't play with a stream for thousands of people. So I guess since the tribunal doesn't do shit and Riot is only going to bother banning when they are personally watching, well, I'll just be an ass all I want. Chances of me running into a rioter is slim, the development from tribunal to an actual ban even slimmer. Riot has other ways of enforcing good behavior on stream, what happened to all the people who were saying how the featured streamer function does exactly that? You troll on stream, you don't get featured. Simple and clear cut. You troll on stream at a bad time and get banned? What kind of random rules are we going by here to ban? Has one game always weighted that much? What happens to all the people who get slapped on the wrist (not even) for similar behavior in one game due to tribunal? Meh, to me, this is as much of an abuse as the whole affair with Psyonic, if anything, it is worse because people actually looks at it positively. due process? wat? People need to not bring real life law to the interwebs as the basis of their argument. This is like people crying freedom of speech on forums. The Tribunal is not a real trial. There is no due process. You do realize the same thing happens here on TL, right? Mods ban users when they see it. Sometimes people get away with things worse than what we ban for due to oversight. Does that reflect poorly on TL that we don't catch every infraction? To me, moderators anywhere can ban on a whim if the reason is justified. You aren't going to catch every infraction, you handle the ones you do see. zzz
Except that what kept TL's posting standards to a certain level is not that moderators catch every infraction, but a high enough rate of them reacting that people stop and think twice about doing dumb shit. To put that in perspective, it would be having a PR guy watching all of the public streams and ban every time they see someone step out of line. If they could do that and actually show the idea that Riot is monitoring the streams, then I wouldn't find the idea as appalling. The thing with Saint looks more to me that one of the Rioters had a gut reaction, pulled the trigger and PR people ran along to make it sound better.
The Tribunal is nothing like a trial, it is a pretty good PR system that also, hopefully, gets people to not do dumb shit because of the pressure of peer review. So to use a TL analogy, it is the report post button we get after posting on TL for so long. The idea being that we report and flag posts for moderators who hand out judgment based on the highlighted post.
The situation with LoL though is nothing like how it operates on TL. Where we can see the result of our reports because of a much smaller population, LoL's player base is much higher and we hardly get the idea that the report function works. Then you follow up with a PR talk about how the report function, in fact, doesn't actually report. That people only act upon the reports after a literal ton of offenses. But, if you are unlucky, you run into a Riot employee and get banned.
It isn't a problem to not ban every problem child, it is however a problem to give the notion that such bans are infrequent and purely luck based. The ban on Saint, to me, enforces the latter view much more than it does anything else when put in contrast of the behavior you catch on stream. So to me this is just a farce, if a mod is only going to look once a day on a specific day, you might as well as never look and preserve the idea that you are watching.
Honestly I think they'd get across the message for players to behave better if they banned, at random, people who got flagged in the tribunal and never explained anything. The inconsistency is an encouragement for the masses to troll, not a warning against bad behavior.
|
On December 21 2011 13:02 tissue wrote:
SV wasn't trolling, when he jungles he ganks minions all the time, he's just ganking the jungle creeps as a laner now.
actively bragging about it is what got him in trouble
|
I feel like I am just going to walk in circles trying to point out that TL isnt' Riot and you can't moderate one like the other so I am just going to disagree and politely bow out. Sides I want to move on to more fun topics.
Think we'll see a new Rammus skin because of the spotlight? I am one to hope as I feel he needs something along the lines of bro style. Bromus. What better way to do things then to bro-roll into the enemy and taunt them with your sic bro actions.
|
On December 21 2011 12:58 r.Evo wrote:
Honestly... if I was Riot I'd ban any of his smurfs on stream too. That's what TL would do and it seems to work out well. =P
Riot is a business though. They will generate income from the average player eventually. It isn't in their interests to ban smurfs of people whom they ban.
If TL had micro transactions they'd probably ban a lot less and would never permaban someone and their smurfs.
|
I don't expect any new Rammus skins. Ninja Rammus wasn't long ago and Rammus already has a lot.
|
United States37500 Posts
On December 21 2011 13:03 Ecael wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 12:48 NeoIllusions wrote:On December 21 2011 12:29 Ecael wrote:On December 21 2011 12:16 NeoIllusions wrote:
Riot may not be everywhere, but their PR team is top notch. Eh, bullshit. I'd rather see him troll and get away with it because the due process sucks rather than knowing that Rioters will ban at a whim. What the ban reflects to me is not that Riot cares about the playerbase, but that it is willing to hang people randomly to set an example. It might have been a good PR move, but it reflects horribly upon the way things work currently far as I am concerned. There are plenty of shit players who get away with consistently worse behavior than what Saint did one game. Saint was a dick for intentionally fucking the guy over, but getting banned just because some Rioters caught sight of it in action when dozens more troll consistently and are shown in streams, albeit not their own? zzz On December 21 2011 12:12 overt wrote:On December 21 2011 12:00 Parnage wrote:
It also weakens the thing they are promoting. "You should use tribunal and report them, but don't worry we'll just ban the guy at first game we see because we happened to be watching" The Tribunal bans no one. It just tells Riot, "these people should be punished." Most tribunal cases end in a warning from Riot and nothing more. It's only repeat offenders who, after being warned, don't correct their behavior that get temp banned. Pendragon just did an AMA on how the Tribunal works on reddit. Basically, all of this talk about it going through the process is irrelevant since Riot has always banned people when they see something ban worthy. They rarely perm ban people. It's a pretty cool methodology of wanting players to just improve their attitude rather than just flat out punish them forever. It's three fuckin' days. Maybe now saint won't tell people, "I'll throw games and make more money than you doing it" or follow people around stealing their CS. And again, it probably wasn't just for one game. He was being a dick to other people earlier today too.Nevermind. He was banned for just that one game. I agree with Riot's reasoning though. Frankly I feel like this promotes bad behavior more than anything else. How much bitching and taunting do you see people do about how the tribunal doesn't work? Fortunately for me, I am not saint and I don't play with a stream for thousands of people. So I guess since the tribunal doesn't do shit and Riot is only going to bother banning when they are personally watching, well, I'll just be an ass all I want. Chances of me running into a rioter is slim, the development from tribunal to an actual ban even slimmer. Riot has other ways of enforcing good behavior on stream, what happened to all the people who were saying how the featured streamer function does exactly that? You troll on stream, you don't get featured. Simple and clear cut. You troll on stream at a bad time and get banned? What kind of random rules are we going by here to ban? Has one game always weighted that much? What happens to all the people who get slapped on the wrist (not even) for similar behavior in one game due to tribunal? Meh, to me, this is as much of an abuse as the whole affair with Psyonic, if anything, it is worse because people actually looks at it positively. due process? wat? People need to not bring real life law to the interwebs as the basis of their argument. This is like people crying freedom of speech on forums. The Tribunal is not a real trial. There is no due process. You do realize the same thing happens here on TL, right? Mods ban users when they see it. Sometimes people get away with things worse than what we ban for due to oversight. Does that reflect poorly on TL that we don't catch every infraction? To me, moderators anywhere can ban on a whim if the reason is justified. You aren't going to catch every infraction, you handle the ones you do see. zzz Except that what kept TL's posting standards to a certain level is not that moderators catch every infraction, but a high enough rate of them reacting that people stop and think twice about doing dumb shit. To put that in perspective, it would be having a PR guy watching all of the public streams and ban every time they see someone step out of line. If they could do that and actually show the idea that Riot is monitoring the streams, then I wouldn't find the idea as appalling. The thing with Saint looks more to me that one of the Rioters had a gut reaction, pulled the trigger and PR people ran along to make it sound better. The Tribunal is nothing like a trial, it is a pretty good PR system that also, hopefully, gets people to not do dumb shit because of the pressure of peer review. So to use a TL analogy, it is the report post button we get after posting on TL for so long. The idea being that we report and flag posts for moderators who hand out judgment based on the highlighted post. The situation with LoL though is nothing like how it operates on TL. Where we can see the result of our reports because of a much smaller population, LoL's player base is much higher and we hardly get the idea that the report function works. Then you follow up with a PR talk about how the report function, in fact, doesn't actually report. That people only act upon the reports after a literal ton of offenses. But, if you are unlucky, you run into a Riot employee and get banned. It isn't a problem to not ban every problem child, it is however a problem to give the notion that such bans are infrequent and purely luck based. The ban on Saint, to me, enforces the latter view much more than it does anything else when put in contrast of the behavior you catch on stream. So to me this is just a farce, if a mod is only going to look once a day on a specific day, you might as well as never look and preserve the idea that you are watching. Honestly I think they'd get across the message for players to behave better if they banned, at random, people who got flagged in the tribunal and never explained anything. The inconsistency is an encouragement for the masses to troll, not a warning against bad behavior.
Ok, there's is a lot more that I agree with in this post than your previous. Your assessment of TL is correct, LoL's population is huge in comparison, so it's no wonder that it's more difficult to moderate. It is a pity that Riot doesn't have a more active system to weed out the trash in our community.
Yes, the individual banning of saint does make it look like Riot's actions are infrequent and purely luck based but I wouldn't let saint skate off scot free because of how it would look retroactively. No, I don't see Riot inconsistency as an encouragement to trolls. Trolls can view Riot as slow, in which they are, but they aren't incompetent. Trolls will get caught "eventually", it's up to the individual if they want to play that game. If they see an infraction, Riot handles it. There's no just reason to just let it slide out of some semblance of consistency (we're watching but we're really not) when the semblance is false.
Riot should deal with what they can and strive for more consistency thereon.
Edit: Ecael, I understand where you're coming from and I get your stance. I just thought your "due process" line was total bs, other than that, it's an issue of perspective. I've shared my spiel on the saint banning and Riot's decision, so I bow out of this topic as well.
|
On December 21 2011 12:58 r.Evo wrote:
Honestly... if I was Riot I'd ban any of his smurfs on stream too. That's what TL would do and it seems to work out well. =P
UMMMMM
as much as I'd like to agree uhhhhhh ... what?
If Random TLer 1 and Respected TL member 2 were in the same league of legends game, and a mod was moderating it like a forum thread.......
Random TLer 1 locks in jungle after Respected TL member 2 calls it.
then
Random TLer 1 banned.
So, if TL moderators were in charge of what went down, the guy who picked jungle after Saint called it would be gone.
|
You don't get to "call" a role.
|
rofl @ anyone that isn't called TheOddOne taking jungler away from SV.
|
In the top lane matchup - Nasus vs tryn - who is supposed to have the advantage? Also how should you optimally open for both of them?
|
On December 21 2011 13:19 tobi9999 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 12:58 r.Evo wrote:
Honestly... if I was Riot I'd ban any of his smurfs on stream too. That's what TL would do and it seems to work out well. =P UMMMMM as much as I'd like to agree uhhhhhh ... what? If Random TLer 1 and Respected TL member 2 were in the same league of legends game, and a mod was moderating it like a forum thread....... Random TLer 1 locks in jungle after Respected TL member 2 calls it. then Random TLer 1 banned. So, if TL moderators were in charge of what went down, the guy who picked jungle after Saint called it would be gone.
You can't just "call" stuff and expect to get it. That only works in grade school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
