MOBAFire's first Mini Guide Contest of Season 14 is here! Create or update guides for the 30 featured champions and compete for up to $200 in prizes! š
Xiaowiriamu wrote:
It's all psychological and mentally imbued I suppose Vynertje. I do not believe you'll feel comfortable being reported for random reasons each game, even if you knew you weren't going to get banned.
It's like me calling someone ugly, but they're not. There's no repercussions for me calling that person ugly, I'm not going to get arrested etc. But the person being called ugly is going to portray reasonable emotions such as being annoyed, upset, or angry..or even confused. It is only in exceptional circumstances where I may get repercussions.
Besides, some of the 5 points I listed you can get banned for, e.g. going afk due to circumstances you cannot control, that for me is the reason I've been banned previously.
So getting reports does matter, regardless of whether you get banned or not.
This is probably just a difference between you and me, but I really don't care if I'm getting reported for not talking in a game when I KNOW I haven't done anything wrong. Some things that are said in-game do affect me personally, but threatening to report me for some random *** reason doesn't.
I mean, some examples: some guy once threatened to report me for being "a useless girl playing useless champ" (im not even a girl lmao, although falseogod tries to prove otherwise) which was so absurd that it only made me laugh, and I got reported too for "tryharding" multiple times. I think I've even been reported (or threatened to report) for "being boosted".
Edit to add: on the afk thingy, while I can't judge your "circumstances you cannot control", I don't think you get banned that quickly. I've had to leave/afk games or had DC's but only once got a leaverbuster warning and no bans. If you got banned multiple times, it must've been a pretty frequent occurrence.
Xiaowiriamu wrote:
It's all psychological and mentally imbued I suppose Vynertje. I do not believe you'll feel comfortable being reported for random reasons each game, even if you knew you weren't going to get banned.
It's like me calling someone ugly, but they're not. There's no repercussions for me calling that person ugly, I'm not going to get arrested etc. But the person being called ugly is going to portray reasonable emotions such as being annoyed, upset, or angry..or even confused. It is only in exceptional circumstances where I may get repercussions.
Besides, some of the 5 points I listed you can get banned for, e.g. going afk due to circumstances you cannot control, that for me is the reason I've been banned previously.
So getting reports does matter, regardless of whether you get banned or not.
It's like me calling someone ugly, but they're not. There's no repercussions for me calling that person ugly, I'm not going to get arrested etc. But the person being called ugly is going to portray reasonable emotions such as being annoyed, upset, or angry..or even confused. It is only in exceptional circumstances where I may get repercussions.
Besides, some of the 5 points I listed you can get banned for, e.g. going afk due to circumstances you cannot control, that for me is the reason I've been banned previously.
So getting reports does matter, regardless of whether you get banned or not.
But if you are afk, even if it is out of your control, you're ruining the game to 9 other people. And unless you're with 4 premades, the other guys don't have a reason to believe you unless you actually come back (and even then the leaverbuster system can automatically ban you).
EDIT:
Vynertje wrote:
It's true, the majority of players are 'neutral' players, the sum of their behaviour isn't negative or positive.
The thing that causes games to spiral out of hand (in terms of toxicity) is when one player starts going off on another, it causes a negative atmosphere that can carry over to other players. People don't just ignore the one toxic guy, they respond to him and that causes even more flame/****talk etc.
Also humans have very selective memory, we tend to highlight those negative experiences and we forget about all the neutral ones.
Finally, I'd like to argue that sometimes, you as a player are the common factor and cause of those negative experiences without actually being toxic yourself. In other words, one could be a 'neutral' player but having a wrong approach in dealing with toxic players, flame or criticism. You may be adding fuel to the fire by starting an argument instead of ignoring, etc. I'm not calling out anyone specific here, but I know it happens to certain people (myself included).
The thing that causes games to spiral out of hand (in terms of toxicity) is when one player starts going off on another, it causes a negative atmosphere that can carry over to other players. People don't just ignore the one toxic guy, they respond to him and that causes even more flame/****talk etc.
Also humans have very selective memory, we tend to highlight those negative experiences and we forget about all the neutral ones.
Finally, I'd like to argue that sometimes, you as a player are the common factor and cause of those negative experiences without actually being toxic yourself. In other words, one could be a 'neutral' player but having a wrong approach in dealing with toxic players, flame or criticism. You may be adding fuel to the fire by starting an argument instead of ignoring, etc. I'm not calling out anyone specific here, but I know it happens to certain people (myself included).
Vynertje wrote:
The only champion that people immediately recognized as OP was Skarner, most people (including pros) thought that Fiora, Mordekaiser and Darius were pretty **** upon rework. Taking that into consideration, it doesn't surprise me that Riot failed to recognize that too.
Pros were practicing Fiora and Darius in scrims as soon as they got hotfix buffed, and mordekaiser was permabanned as soon as the patch hit
Ok late to the party, but wanted to give my thoughts on the video;
I agree with almost everything Dunky said about the game, and in my old state of mind, I feel extactly the same way. I felt like the match making was denying me fun by forcing me to carry harder than I thought should be necessary to even win one game.
Next; Why would they ban Dunky for being "toxic" when it's pretty clear that half the **** he says is for satire or for reactions in his videos? I've never seen him play o stream so I may be wrong (is he actually toxic when he plays? cause it seems like an act).
Lastly, I have quit the game many times over this train of thought, but I now treat the game as a mental exercise, and since starting that thinking, I've had a lot more fun.
I agree with almost everything Dunky said about the game, and in my old state of mind, I feel extactly the same way. I felt like the match making was denying me fun by forcing me to carry harder than I thought should be necessary to even win one game.
Next; Why would they ban Dunky for being "toxic" when it's pretty clear that half the **** he says is for satire or for reactions in his videos? I've never seen him play o stream so I may be wrong (is he actually toxic when he plays? cause it seems like an act).
Lastly, I have quit the game many times over this train of thought, but I now treat the game as a mental exercise, and since starting that thinking, I've had a lot more fun.
OTGBionicArm wrote:
Next; Why would they ban Dunky for being "toxic" when it's pretty clear that half the **** he says is for satire or for reactions in his videos? I've never seen him play o stream so I may be wrong (is he actually toxic when he plays? cause it seems like an act).
He's actually extremely toxic when not in videos too. Like, they wouldn't ban someone off of "funny" videos, which I honestly don't think he's that funny, which is beside the point. Like, you don't get banned for one offense. You get banned for a ****load of them.
Sig courtesy of GrandmasterD. Go get your own sig from them. :D
OTGBionicArm wrote:
Well, all the **** I've ever seen him say, it's always been over the top. Like I personally shrug that **** off. I feel like I have been a far more toxic player in the past just by being negative (not even cursing at people).
Xiaowiriamu wrote:
These can be defined as 'extreme cases' but they're cases that are pretty much the norm. You state "it really doesn't happen", but it has, it has happened to me... You can ask a wide selection of people whether they've been reported for "refusing to communicate" despite they were communicating, and you'll be surprised at the answer. I have been reported for negative attitude for constructively telling a Shen to take Randiuns rather than thornmail because the item was more beneficial against the team we were facing. Obviously the shen took it to heart as me trying to damage his "play". His response was along the lines of "Don't teach me how to play my own champ, im better than you at shen, so please stfu, reported". Now these are rare occasions, but it happens. You can't say one thing to another player without them taking it the wrong way... even small things like "Support can you ward please, we need vision, and you've not been warding for past 6minutes" can be deemed as 'negative attitude' to some players.
You seem to be neglecting the fact that I have my own experiences within this game as well, and since you are using your own experience as evidence, then I'll use my own experience as evidence, and will say I disagree because my experiences are that this is not a common occurrence. If what you say is the case for you, then all I can say is I'm sorry your experience has been ****tier than mine. I'm not going to deny these things happen, or call you a flat-out liar because these things can happen and it isn't far fetched that it does happen, but what I'm getting at is that being convinced something is true solely based on what you have experienced is trivial evidence because people do have different experiences, and it's fine to base your opinion based on your own experience, I mean, that's human nature, but you can't just ignore what other people experience if you want an accurate opinion.
Also, I'm really not sold on the "You can ask a wide selection of people whether they've been reported for "refusing to communicate" despite they were communicating, and you'll be surprised at the answer," primarily because, once again, I have never seen this occur in my time playing League unless it was actually genuine, and also because this is just such a vague sample space you're using. I mean, I could just say that there are a lot of people out there that are very quiet in games and don't get reported, but that doesn't mean anything to me or anyone really. It becomes meaningful and relevant to what I'm saying once I point out the fact that approximately 89% of the player base are considered neutral, that is, a person that is generally quiet. If we're looking at what you've said factually and logically, then what you're saying doesn't add up, because within that 89%, I highly doubt a lot of people get reported by a person that is most likely going to behave the exact same way. That would make a person a hypocrite, and saying that there is a large number of hypocrites within the League community is bold statement with too weak of a foundation to hold it up. Of course, due to how vague that original statement was and how safe you were approaching it, it honestly difficult for me to pick it apart because you can simply morph it into a meaning you didn't originally intend. But I think the cautious approach itself speaks enough to say that you aren't too proud of that statement either.
Xiaowiriamu wrote:
As for the other issues they do happen but it is rare - "I just think that these are just the most extreme cases, and definitely an exaggeration." Well if they're most extreme cases, and do happen, and theoretically can happen, then its not an exaggeration. The 5 points I listed are from my experience, and relate closely to the undermining message Dunkey is expressing.
Perhaps errors in wording and context is killing us both here, because the exaggeration was referring to how frequently you claim these reports occur. The term "extreme cases" typically refers to cases that are so convoluted that the chances of them happening are unlikely. The fact that these cases were made out to be common within your original post is exaggeration. And if you claim that based on your original wording that they aren't common, then why are you even using them as examples in the first place as they clearly aren't detrimental issues since their occurrence would probably be low, and the examples you listed are "one-offs" or anomalies.
The thing with Dunkey and all video content creators of his sort is that saying that he experiences the exact same **** that you do so it clearly must be an issue is that they show videos of a game that have been heavily edited. Of, say, 200 games he played to make it from Bronze/Silver to Plat IV, he only showed about 6 or so games that were extreme in how toxic it was. Additionally, the main focus of his videos aren't even to demonstrate how good he is or that he's climbing. He is famous for being one of the funniest League of Legends content creators out there, so obviously the content he picks out would be akin to what his aims are. No one wants to see a montage of him getting 5 man
Cyclones in his journey climbing as that's not funny. Seeing a Malphite feed his *** off while Dunkey goes upon his usual sarcastic rage IS funny and is something Dunkey can work with.Xiaowiriamu wrote:
I believe its my own error in the way I worded the post, I'm not saying it happens all the time E.g. every-time I give constructive criticism I get reported, but it does happen :) And only reflects how poor this community is, especially in Season 5. And as you've pointed out it is "sadly true".
Once again, inference says otherwise, but inferring doesn't mean you actually said it.
But something I would simply like to say is that it's funny how what you say has shifted to "only getting reported for these actions and that makes me feel bad mentally so it's an issue" despite you explicitly saying in your original post that you can get banned for those scenarios, and that being banned for those scenarios are the real issue.
Xiaowiriamu wrote:
Some of the reasons you can get banned for are beyond pathetic...
Xiaowiriamu wrote:
It's all psychological and mentally imbued I suppose Vynertje. I do not believe you'll feel comfortable being reported for random reasons each game, even if you knew you weren't going to get banned.
It's like me calling someone ugly, but they're not. There's no repercussions for me calling that person ugly, I'm not going to get arrested etc. But the person being called ugly is going to portray reasonable emotions such as being annoyed, upset, or angry..or even confused. It is only in exceptional circumstances where I may get repercussions.
Besides, some of the 5 points I listed you can get banned for, e.g. going afk due to circumstances you cannot control, that for me is the reason I've been banned previously.
So getting reports does matter, regardless of whether you get banned or not.
Real smooth.
|
Imma 'bout to end this man's whole career My rather unimpressive and slowly growing anime list! Currently watching:
Nisekoi: False Love |
|
Man your arguing with me for no reason now... Do you even really read my posts? You're dissecting my post to make it appear ambiguous even more so than it already was because the wording was pretty poor. Can I not simply post my experiences and opinions...my post was simply an agreement to what Dunkey faces, of which many have agreed with as well, alongside my experiences for which I additional find the game unattractive, to a little rant about how prevaricated the community can be. If I knew I had some Clifford Chance prosecutor reading my post I probably would of made a little more effort into making it less ambiguous and more simplified... but here we are.
1. In your original post you stated that the given scenarios do not happen. I replied that they do because it happened to me... see the little details here? Supplement and evidence. You state "If what you say is the case for you, then all I can say is I'm sorry your experience has been ****tier than mine. I'm not going to deny these things happen, or call you a flat-out liar because these things can happen and it isn't far fetched that it does happen, but what I'm getting at is that being convinced something is true solely based on what you have experienced is trivial evidence because people do have different experiences" - Thanks for your concern, some players experiences in the game are fun than others, i guess im on the latter. I was merely replying to the point that you said "they don't happen", even in this statement you say my evidence is trivial, and indirectly untrue... but then go on to agree with me by saying it does happen and everyone has difference experiences suggesting it also can happen to other people. I guess maybe I might be reading into your posts too much as well, or wording is killing us both.
2. I never set a specific "frequency" on how much the given scenarios occur, they were simply issues I've experienced, and I'm sure others have too.
3. Thanks for the definition of extreme cases, but I actually did refer in the commencing post they can be defined as "extreme" or rare, just the wording I chose was poor. So I'm lightly agreeing with you on that point. I didn't 100% clarify it in my original post, I thought it was clear I wasn't saying it happens all the time. I did, however, in my commencing post, point out its became the norm, but respectively speaking from my experience (rng). Wording is killing us both.
4. Please, you know damn well I didn't directly say those scenarios were common or even made them out to be, they're simply a list of problems I've experienced.
5. "explicitly saying in your original post that you can get banned for those scenarios" again wording is killing you, I even clarified it was a separate point but you still like to think I explicitly stated you get banned for them. Why do you not see in my original post, unedited, that I stated "get reported" etc, and only for scenario 4 I said "reported and banned"...Com'on now. The fact you get banned for pathetic reasons was a separate point.
6. "...and that being banned for those scenarios are the real issue" ????
7. Thanks for the statistics (..89%...), nice to know someone is going to town with my posts. but I think you overlooked the point I was trying to make. I wasn't directly making a statistically analysis, but I applaud you for your commentary. the issue here was you stating "it really doesn't happen". The point I made about it happened to me was enough to debunk yours, and the "you'll be surprised at the answer" was a little nudge to say i'm probably not the only one, so you'll be surprised at that. I think you're going into my posts too much, you're obviously applying some form of Mischief approach to everything I type, rather than a literal or golden approach.
8. "...it honestly difficult for me to pick it apart because you can simply morph it into a meaning you didn't originally intend". I guess your assignment this week was to find a vague post and pick it apart, knowing damn well that it can be morphed into another meaning, that's not very clever... "smooth" though. I enjoy the fact you try to indirectly reference that you know what I original intended, guess what? you don't. If we take it in your value that I did originally intend that the scenarios I faced were everyone's scenarios, and they happen frequently...the real question is where does it state that?
Applause on my behalf for reading into my post far too much to miss out the subtle tones. Words can be ambiguous, and the structure of my post originally wasn't the greatest (this is twice I've said this), it was late morning for me, and expressing views via type isn't efficiently effective. Maybe I should just edit that post to bullet points with simple words. It'll probably succumb to less wannabe prosecutors like yourself under-marking and reading into too much of each word I express. I do find it funny you admit yourself, and even I admitted the post was ambiguous for which I ended up clarifying my point afterwards, only for you to state the opposite of what I was clarifying. That's a key issue into reading into posts too much. The original post was vague for reasons expressed above (oh wait that's vague as well, I mean reasons expressed in this paragraph).
Anyway, thanks for the response and thought provoking discussion, I look forward to your next post, maybe give me a graph; some statistical analysis; chaos theory... I'm kidding of course.
Notes to HiFromBuddha:
(1) My purpose was not to neglect anyone else's experience, the question of this thread was universal and I expressed my opinions and experiences entirely.
(2) "...with Dunkey and all video content creators of his sort is that saying that he experiences the exact same **** that you do..." I didn't express he experiences exactly what I do :/
1. In your original post you stated that the given scenarios do not happen. I replied that they do because it happened to me... see the little details here? Supplement and evidence. You state "If what you say is the case for you, then all I can say is I'm sorry your experience has been ****tier than mine. I'm not going to deny these things happen, or call you a flat-out liar because these things can happen and it isn't far fetched that it does happen, but what I'm getting at is that being convinced something is true solely based on what you have experienced is trivial evidence because people do have different experiences" - Thanks for your concern, some players experiences in the game are fun than others, i guess im on the latter. I was merely replying to the point that you said "they don't happen", even in this statement you say my evidence is trivial, and indirectly untrue... but then go on to agree with me by saying it does happen and everyone has difference experiences suggesting it also can happen to other people. I guess maybe I might be reading into your posts too much as well, or wording is killing us both.
2. I never set a specific "frequency" on how much the given scenarios occur, they were simply issues I've experienced, and I'm sure others have too.
3. Thanks for the definition of extreme cases, but I actually did refer in the commencing post they can be defined as "extreme" or rare, just the wording I chose was poor. So I'm lightly agreeing with you on that point. I didn't 100% clarify it in my original post, I thought it was clear I wasn't saying it happens all the time. I did, however, in my commencing post, point out its became the norm, but respectively speaking from my experience (rng). Wording is killing us both.
4. Please, you know damn well I didn't directly say those scenarios were common or even made them out to be, they're simply a list of problems I've experienced.
5. "explicitly saying in your original post that you can get banned for those scenarios" again wording is killing you, I even clarified it was a separate point but you still like to think I explicitly stated you get banned for them. Why do you not see in my original post, unedited, that I stated "get reported" etc, and only for scenario 4 I said "reported and banned"...Com'on now. The fact you get banned for pathetic reasons was a separate point.
6. "...and that being banned for those scenarios are the real issue" ????
7. Thanks for the statistics (..89%...), nice to know someone is going to town with my posts. but I think you overlooked the point I was trying to make. I wasn't directly making a statistically analysis, but I applaud you for your commentary. the issue here was you stating "it really doesn't happen". The point I made about it happened to me was enough to debunk yours, and the "you'll be surprised at the answer" was a little nudge to say i'm probably not the only one, so you'll be surprised at that. I think you're going into my posts too much, you're obviously applying some form of Mischief approach to everything I type, rather than a literal or golden approach.
8. "...it honestly difficult for me to pick it apart because you can simply morph it into a meaning you didn't originally intend". I guess your assignment this week was to find a vague post and pick it apart, knowing damn well that it can be morphed into another meaning, that's not very clever... "smooth" though. I enjoy the fact you try to indirectly reference that you know what I original intended, guess what? you don't. If we take it in your value that I did originally intend that the scenarios I faced were everyone's scenarios, and they happen frequently...the real question is where does it state that?
Applause on my behalf for reading into my post far too much to miss out the subtle tones. Words can be ambiguous, and the structure of my post originally wasn't the greatest (this is twice I've said this), it was late morning for me, and expressing views via type isn't efficiently effective. Maybe I should just edit that post to bullet points with simple words. It'll probably succumb to less wannabe prosecutors like yourself under-marking and reading into too much of each word I express. I do find it funny you admit yourself, and even I admitted the post was ambiguous for which I ended up clarifying my point afterwards, only for you to state the opposite of what I was clarifying. That's a key issue into reading into posts too much. The original post was vague for reasons expressed above (oh wait that's vague as well, I mean reasons expressed in this paragraph).
Anyway, thanks for the response and thought provoking discussion, I look forward to your next post, maybe give me a graph; some statistical analysis; chaos theory... I'm kidding of course.
Notes to HiFromBuddha:
(1) My purpose was not to neglect anyone else's experience, the question of this thread was universal and I expressed my opinions and experiences entirely.
(2) "...with Dunkey and all video content creators of his sort is that saying that he experiences the exact same **** that you do..." I didn't express he experiences exactly what I do :/
You need to log in before commenting.
What does getting reported matter if you're not getting any bans off of it anyway?
It's all psychological and mentally imbued I suppose Vynertje. I do not believe you'll feel comfortable being reported for random reasons each game, even if you knew you weren't going to get banned.
It's like me calling someone ugly, but they're not. There's no repercussions for me calling that person ugly, I'm not going to get arrested etc. But the person being called ugly is going to portray reasonable emotions such as being annoyed, upset, or angry..or even confused. It is only in exceptional circumstances where I may get repercussions.
Besides, some of the 5 points I listed you can get banned for, e.g. going afk due to circumstances you cannot control, that for me is the reason I've been banned previously.
So getting reports does matter, regardless of whether you get banned or not.
The thing that causes games to spiral out of hand (in terms of toxicity) is when one player starts going off on another, it causes a negative atmosphere that can carry over to other players. People don't just ignore the one toxic guy, they respond to him and that causes even more flame/****talk etc.
Also humans have very selective memory, we tend to highlight those negative experiences and we forget about all the neutral ones.
Finally, I'd like to argue that sometimes, you as a player are the common factor and cause of those negative experiences without actually being toxic yourself. In other words, one could be a 'neutral' player but having a wrong approach in dealing with toxic players, flame or criticism. You may be adding fuel to the fire by starting an argument instead of ignoring, etc. I'm not calling out anyone specific here, but I know it happens to certain people (myself included).
+1