God of Seas (EUNE)
: As i said I've intentionally not included the whole game or names. Additionally I tried to give off as little info about about anyone - by cropping the screenshots, a lot, to ensure anonymity - as possible. The only one being overly negative - with no apparent reason - here, is you and I'm not gonna lie; I'm pretty confused, since I did my best to make myself clear and had no malevolent intent whatsoever.
ok so heres the thing i dont speak russian, i assumed the cyrillic characters on the OPGG parts you linked were the specific player names, i now realise i made a mistake, and in fact you havnt broken any rules of the boards. although i will say, my point about it being a false equivalence still stands i mean its the same thing as me saying that football team A is 'better' than football team B, and the evidence i have to support that is the whole season results for team A, whilst only providing one games results for team B you cant compare the 2
Infernape (EUW)
: They did... on Twitter. Funny isn't it.
right, because its soooo beneficial to report issues on social media that not every player may use instead of their own website or even in client....
: i think that is it , since I only have this log shown when I log in .
you misunderstand what i mean the chat log they have sent you is the game that triggered the ban that says nothing about your previous behaviour (maybe you can request your previous chat logs from support i dont know) as has already been said, you dont get banned from ONE game (unless you use what riot claim is 'zero tolerance' such as telling someone to kill themselves, or wishing death to them etc etc you have to have shown previous behavior to have the ban triggered (or as in my previous post, the threat you said to nunu MAY (dont quote me on that, i dont know just throwing something out there) have triggered an instant ban because Riot may see that as a part of the 'zero tolerance' phrases)
: Game 1 In-Game Invalid Love: fk this game# Invalid Love: wtf how can i escape Invalid Love: zz Invalid Love: kill me irl Invalid Love: I CANT ESCAPE Invalid Love: I CANT ESCAPE Invalid Love: HE IS THERE 24/7 Invalid Love: FKING PREMADES Invalid Love: OMFG WHY Invalid Love: EAT SHIBFWEBTR DAND DIWE DYASOU Invalid Love: 1 MORE HIT Invalid Love: JESUS KILL ME Invalid Love: FKIGN IGN IETWEQ Invalid Love: OMG Invalid Love: %%% Invalid Love: PLS %%% Invalid Love: die bribqwrpoqjt] Invalid Love: WTF Invalid Love: WYF8EHQWFOPNWEGNMQWER[GTM# Invalid Love: QW/EGT;MQWEKOTNG[Q]#E Invalid Love: FKING I WANT TO FIND U NUNU IRL Invalid Love: OMG QUINN Invalid Love: this champ# Invalid Love: a[PFNQWEIPFNQWBEEFKPQWEM# Invalid Love: /WEQTMPQNBPWGWE Invalid Love: WQETKRJGE Invalid Love: RPOERT ME Invalid Love: INM DONE Invalid Love: QWRTPOR,2E]REGKRRGN Invalid Love: TrhrTHJTTERH Invalid Love: REHTGRHGNGR Invalid Love: %%%% E AND AUTO AND I DIE Invalid Love: WPWP Invalid Love: PSUHIRIBRESH Invalid Love: GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG Invalid Love: GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG Invalid Love: GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG Invalid Love: GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG Invalid Love: NACKDOOOR Invalid Love: BACKDOOEEEE Invalid Love: eZ Post-Game Invalid Love: EZEZ I think I shouldn't have written EZ after we won the Game
the chat logs that you have been sent btw are just the game/games (sometimes its 3 logs i believe) that led to the punishment, they show nothing of your previous behaviour and as RallerenP said, you dont get banned for 1 game, you have to be continuously negative to trigger a punishment and tbf > Invalid Love: FKING I WANT TO FIND U NUNU IRL would maybe have triggered an instant ban due to being a real life threat
Nadiiro (EUW)
: i get your point and this is the reason why there are patches every 2 weeks , but i think that making his revive ready only if he kills a champ enough to shuckle him .. and about seeing the other side or switching sides .. can be fixed by having the knowledge about the champion kit and not letting what is punishing to happen just like you said "if you see an engage that would make you need the revive dont take that engage in first place" and if you were to switch roles with aatrox (where you have to face him ) then you should see him as if you were playing him and not making that mistake that he waits for (him getting a kill not making it ) but at the end of it .. his revive would put you in a situation where ur going to get killed instead of finishing your carnage.. that movement speed reduction though was frustrating ..
it seems to me you are advocating that if Aatrox gets ONE kill, or a decent trade that forces his opponent to back, he should then ABSOLUTELY dominate the rest of the lane without any counterplay Aatrox gets a kill, he now has gold/lvl advantage come lvl 6 his opponent has no chance to come back because not only does he have to kill a champion that may have a lvl advantage as well as the item advantage, he now has to kill him twice which means the opponent CANNOT engage on him and has to sit under tower (with the revive any good Aatrox will take every opertunity to dive and 95% of the time get out unscathed, possibly with a kill getting him even further ahead having knowledge of the game is what stops the opponent trying to trade (because you wont ever out-trade him) which mean she is FORCED to play incredibly passive and all of this off of ONE kill/good trade now play out that situation without the revive Aatrox gets a kill early, he now has a gold/lvl advantage come lvl 6, his opponent has a slim, (but not non existant) chance at winning engages, and will have to take measured trades until he gets back onto an even footing with Aatrox which means ONE kill/good trade doesnt auto win him the lane i know which of these situations i would rather be, any time i play an aatrox
God of Seas (EUNE)
: Yes I have read the rules and I dont see a reason for you to mention them since I've violated non of these. I just took a comical aproach to what seems to be some insane difficulty to promotion series matches. I'm sorry I tried to make humour in here, that was so inconsiderate of me and will never happen again. I purposelly avoided posting the whole thing in order to keep it anonymous and everyone concerned out of it.
if you have read the rules why did you upload 2 images showing other peoples accounts on OPGG, implying one was 'feeding' (malicious activity/being toxic) while basically %%%%%ing about how the MMR system is FUBAR (granted not against the rules, but negative none-the-less) you played a game where one of your enemies was better than your team, and you had someone on your team that may have had a bad game GET OVER IT
Nadiiro (EUW)
: knew you would say this .. dont take this as a general statement for all champions , its only for Aatrox ,depending on the champion kit and style the ULTIMATE is generally the spell that would give the champions the ability to excel on the rift .. i said it ! .. mostly and generally . Dont take it as a strict sentence.. first of , im with the idea that items should complement ur kit not make it feel useless without them .. second of all im talkin aatrox .. what he was and what he become .. how i used to like him and he become what riot could do is to get rid of the self healing from ulti
and i am making the point that if you, as Aatrox are engaging a fight that you KNOW you cannot win without a revive, perhaps you shouldnt make that engage in the first place. seeing as how his revive has been removed, you need to change your playstyle to reflect that, if you are playing as though you have a revive when you dont, the only person to blame for that is yourself. Think of it from the other side, imagine you are against an Aatrox in lane, he gets an early kill on you..... how the hell are you going to come back from that in any future fight in the game with his revive? you effectivly have to kill an already somewhat fed enemy TWICE. With the change, and the removal of the revive, it opens up some counterplay to that early kill he gets
Nadiiro (EUW)
: Clever answer .. but if you do not need 'a revive' to "finish what you started" either you're too fed or just broken
so every other champion in the game without a revive dont get kills unless they are super fed/broken right? and i guess that means guardian angel should be given to everyone on game start because everyone NEEDS a revive....
: Any Chance I can change my game ban to chat ban ?
if you 'dont mind' a chat or ranked ban then that wouldn't be a punishment for your actions (which you yourself admit were 'pretty horrible')
God of Seas (EUNE)
: one is the player the enemy team got and the other is the performance of your usual yasuo player that we had to get in order to lose this. I don't understand your criticism
it is a false equivalence you are comparing 2 different things 1. a full match history of the kha 2. a single lonely game played by the Yasuo for all i know, the Yasuo could have just had a single bad game, but actually have the same win ratio as the Kha, but because you didnt link that i cant make a judgement as a complete aside to this btw, have you read the 'universal board rules' on the left hand side of the page? https://boards.euw.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/announcements-en/3eWpXbJi-universal-boards-rules-updated-27-04-16 Please don't report a potentially misbehaving player in these boards. If you see or hear about another person breaking the rules, send us a ticket directly so we can investigate and take action if necessary. We know that players report publicly with the best intentions, but it often leads to a witchhunt, rarely resulting in a positive discussion. We’ll be taking action against players who have violated rules, so please report these players correctly. Moderators will be looking for the following: Posts that accuse others of being toxic players in-game Posts accusing others of malicious activity Posts that accuse others of cheating or using illegal services Posts accusing others of trolling in the boards (there’s a report button for that) Posts claiming to have "reported" someone (There's no need to post this information)
God of Seas (EUNE)
: When you are in promos and have been playing too good
any reason why one screenshot shows their overall win rate on a champ but the other shows a single game? false equivalence falicy
: > would you care to elaborate on the SPECIFIC part of the GDPR you are talking of Given that we are talking about a 150 pages legal document here, I obviously can not. I was trained how not to violate GDPR in my job, however, that doesn't make me a lawyer who could help you with your request. > thank you for implying that i photoshopped the screenshot i took, i am sure you have evidence to back that up right? i find this highly offensive I'm not implying that you did, I'm implying that you, me and everyone else could. Everyone could get your account permabanned at any time, without you violating any rule. Would you be okay with that? I doubt it. But that would be the consequence of screenshots as acceptable evidence. > and the MUTE button exists so you can leave ingame chat any time you like, hell you can drag the chatbox off you screen so you never see it, so your claim that ingame chat is 'forced' on you is completely false There is a difference between "opt in" and "opt out". You are ALWAYS put in the chat, with the option to opt out. But you are NEVER in a private chat, unless you opt in, i.e. you decide to do so. > maybe Riot should stop claiming that telling someone to kill themselves is zero tolerance when in fact it isnt, seeing as there is a place where it IS tolerated, that being private chat Would you prefer it that whenever Riot is talking about what they do they add a few pages of legal disclaimers to be 100% technically correct? I think you misunderstand my intention here. Morally, I am 100% on your side. If it were up to me, persons like the ones you described would not only be permabanned, they would also be legally prosecuted. But it's not up to me. And my point here is: It's also not up to Riot. You demand something from them that is simply illegal. It is absolutely okay and understandable that you are upset about that, but it really isn't Riots fault. Blame them for balancing, matchmaking or whatever, but not this. Riot have to follow the law and this really isn't their fault. Your anger is justified. But make sure you aim it at the right target.
> [{quoted}](name=Humpelstilzche,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=n2BfsBFl,comment-id=000000000000000000010001,timestamp=2019-07-21T07:50:05.441+0000) > > Given that we are talking about a 150 pages legal document here, I obviously can not. I was trained how not to violate GDPR in my job, however, that doesn't make me a lawyer who could help you with your request. > convenient that.... > I'm not implying that you did, I'm implying that you, me and everyone else could. Everyone could get your account permabanned at any time, without you violating any rule. Would you be okay with that? I doubt it. But that would be the consequence of screenshots as acceptable evidence. > even in a court of law you are innocent until proven guilty, though it seems to me you are implying that you are guilty until proven innocent (there is the possibility you COULD do something so lets automatically assume you WILL do it) tell me why dont we chat ban everyone, i mean there is the POSSIBILITY they could flame, so lets nip it in the bud before it happens... > There is a difference between "opt in" and "opt out". You are ALWAYS put in the chat, with the option to opt out. But you are NEVER in a private chat, unless you opt in, i.e. you decide to do so. > regardless of the somantics of opt in vs opt out, the Rioters response to my ticket was that because it was a private chat, i had the option to leave, and i am saying IRREGARDLESS of whether you are put into the chat automatically you HAVE THE OPTION to leave (by muting or moving chat box off screen) punishing flamers in one chat 'system' but completely ignoring it in another is completely contradicotory > Would you prefer it that whenever Riot is talking about what they do they add a few pages of legal disclaimers to be 100% technically correct? > no, but i WOULD prefer them not to say something that is outright untrue (that telling someone to kill themselves is zero tolerance when it ISNT
: > thank you for implying that i photoshopped the screenshot i took, i am sure you have evidence to back that up right? i find this highly offensive... Read what he said again. How the fk did you understand that he blamed you for editing the photo? The game don't store the private chat so your photos worth nothing because if they stored the chat then they could compare the photo with what they had and see if is true.
> [{quoted}](name=TheToysTracker,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=n2BfsBFl,comment-id=000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2019-07-21T07:40:10.149+0000) > > Read what he said again. How the fk did you understand that he blamed you for editing the photo? > he didnt outright say it no, but he implied it with the following sentence > [{quoted}](name=Humpelstilzche,realm=EUW,application-id=eZuvYsEr,discussion-id=n2BfsBFl,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-21T06:10:03.755+0000) > a screenshot is simply not sufficient evidence since everyone with basic photoshop skills (hell, even Paint will do the job) could just get everyone banned. >
: The actual reason behind it is, that it's called PRIVATE chat for a reason. "Private" as in "privacy laws". I work for a gaming company (not Riot) myself and we face the same problem. We are not allowed to track private chats due to GDPR and a screenshot is simply not sufficient evidence since everyone with basic photoshop skills (hell, even Paint will do the job) could just get everyone banned. So Riot quite literally can't act on this kind of report. That's not their fault, that's the law. If you don't like that, don't blame Riot but blame your government (or in this case: EU) representatives. And in the end Riot are right with their argument: You can leave a private chat at any time and who you start a private conversation with is your choice. Contrary to the chat, this is not forced on you, you decide to engage in conversation with random strangers. Of course, all of that doesn't make that other guy any less of a jerk, but there are simply limits how much Riot can protect you from your own decisions.
would you care to elaborate on the SPECIFIC part of the GDPR you are talking of, all i have found is information saying it has to do with Riot (as a data processor/controller) has to change the way they handle 'personal' and 'sensitive' data of its 'clients' and that they have to hire something called a 'data protection officer' > and a screenshot is simply not sufficient evidence since everyone with basic photoshop skills (hell, even Paint will do the job) could just get everyone banned. > thank you for implying that i photoshopped the screenshot i took, i am sure you have evidence to back that up right? i find this highly offensive... > You can leave a private chat at any time and who you start a private conversation with is your choice. and the MUTE button exists so you can leave ingame chat any time you like, hell you can drag the chatbox off you screen so you never see it, so your claim that ingame chat is 'forced' on you is completely false > Of course, all of that doesn't make that other guy any less of a jerk, but there are simply limits how much Riot can protect you from your own decisions. maybe Riot should stop claiming that telling someone to kill themselves is zero tolerance when in fact it isnt, seeing as there is a place where it IS tolerated, that being private chat
: Yeah, and I have a screenshot of it.
then i will catagorically state NOTHING will be done about it a couple months ago i added someone after a game to offer a little advice (i have a potato PC and he had left the end of game screen, so i added him) he IMMEDIATLY told me to kill myself, wished cancer and ebola on my family and wished death to all my loved ones, (all of which Riot maintain are 'zero tolerance' phrases i might add) i too had a screenshot of the conversation and opened a ticket (and told the guy in the private chat i would do so, which he laughed off and was confident that nothing would be done to him) Riots initial response was 'its private chat we dont have access to it, therefore i do not know what was said' when i responded saying that i had sent screenshots of what was said, his 'excuse' suddenly changed to 'it was a private chat you could have left at any time, it was your fault that the conversation continued' and then went on to AGREE with the flamer (saying that nothing would be done because it was a private chat) when i asked him if this was Riots logic, how could he justify chat bans, my reasoning being that you can mute at any time, and therefore 'leave' the conversation so if someone doesnt mute, its their 'fault' if they are being flamed he marked the ticket as 'solved' and closed the ticket
: Player support tickets not working.
was it in a private chat (after adding him as a 'friend')?
xAG Rewd (EUW)
: they don't want it in their team? well I feel like thats not their decision my dude.
just the same as their decision on which champion they want to ban is not your decision
Nadiiro (EUW)
: the R healing was nerfed by making it self healing which implies buffing it or nerfing it doesn't seem to make any noticeable difference. but the revive used to give aatrox a chance to finish what he started or to outplay fed opponents this makes him kind of a bit useless without it
if you are starting fights RELYING on the revive part of his ult for a 'chance to finish what he started' perhaps you should pick your engages better....
Aezander (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Tarolock,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=AoluGIMc,comment-id=00000000000000000001,timestamp=2019-07-19T07:47:26.332+0000) > > this might blow your mind: but what about pointing out mistakes without being toxic about it? Valliant effort, but, unfortunately, no. There's a reason why criticism is done after the game (or while you're on the bench). Your mind, while playing, is not in a state to receive critism, so when you try that you're essentially adding more distractions and potentially paint yourself as a target to vent frustration and after that everything goes down hill. You can offer advice, neutrally, ... "*Their AD r fed we need Armour*" or "Play def and we got this late*" and *etcetera* ... but even then it's a coin toss, because you don't know how the people you are playing with react under pressure. So go simple. Throw a *gj*, *wp*, *that's all you man* when something positive happens, and build their confidence and morale. Ping objectives and throw in a "*let's set up for this*" (doesn't really work in Low Elo much cause as far as I've seen everybody is running after kills when not dying because they run in a no vision area ... But as I said 'hope'). And above else pray to Zeus he doesn't %%%% you from behind for that game. {{summoner:31}}
> [{quoted}](name=Aezander,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=AoluGIMc,comment-id=000000000000000000010001,timestamp=2019-07-19T08:11:00.147+0000) > > > > You can offer advice, neutrally, ... "*Their AD r fed we need Armour*" or "Play def and we got this late*" and *etcetera* ... but even then it's a coin toss, because you don't know how the people you are playing with react under pressure. > except the vast majority of people (at least in bronze elo) would consider this advice given neutrally AS the flame, and report you for it anyway...
Nxether (EUW)
: Can't get the mastery chest after achieving an S- rank (Screenshots below)
have you already earned a box with Kai'sa? you can only attain one box per S per champ per season afaik
: How do you know who has first pick anyways? It seems like in most my games enemy have priority over picks
when the lobby 'starts' over either your team or the enemy team will be 'First Pick'. I think it disappears either after banning phase, or after the first pick has locked in, unsure which
xAG Rewd (EUW)
: Teammates shouldn't be able to ban another teammates
i ban the same champion every game, what makes you think i am gonna change what i do to suit you (granted if you are first pick, i may let you have it, but other than that... %%%% NO)
DoomBird (EUW)
: Profile - Stats don't work?
i have played my placements and 11 further games over the past week or so, yet my stats pages says 'No ranked or normal games played this season, please play some games to unlock your stats'
Mada (EUW)
: laws don't matter
> [{quoted}](name=Mada,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=6caWJkAA,comment-id=0000000300000002,timestamp=2019-07-08T13:54:50.218+0000) > > laws don't matter i guess thats why everyone goes around stealing from everyone else, and occasionally commiting the odd murder right? obvious troll is obvious...
: I think you are trying to analyze this too deep... You take every word too literally and then continue explaining stuff which maybe sounds smart but it isn't. You don't answer his question on how to avoid smurfs but just say "don't play it because it's against rules". Who knows maybe his parents agreed or his brother to terms of service. When did I say it's ok? Dude what are you smoking? With such toxicity in the game it may be bad influence for kids but having access to internet alone gives them ability to see far worse stuff. I never did say it was ok just because there are worse things out there. Honestly you probably break ToS rules daily without even knowing it. These are rules and not laws so I don't think 12 year old kid playing a game rated for 13 year old kids is something you could bring people to court.
> [{quoted}](name=GrìmoreWeiss,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=6caWJkAA,comment-id=000000030000000100000000,timestamp=2019-07-07T21:31:20.089+0000) > > I think you are trying to analyze this too deep... and you are sticking your head in the sand, your point? > You take every word too literally and then continue explaining stuff which maybe sounds smart but it isn't. You don't answer his question on how to avoid smurfs but just say "don't play it because it's against rules". except i did answer his question.... answer this, if his brother stopped playing, do you think he would 'face trolls'? >Who knows maybe his parents agreed or his brother to terms of service. which, as i have stated would be FRAUD > When did I say it's ok? Dude what are you smoking? With such toxicity in the game it may be bad influence for kids but having access to internet alone gives them ability to see far worse stuff. I never did say it was ok just because there are worse things out there. so, if by this sentence you are not implying that because there are worse things that could be done (say, having unfettered access to the internet) that makes his rule breaking fine, and i am making a fuss about nothing, what is your point in making this statement? > Honestly you probably break ToS rules daily without even knowing it. These are rules and not laws so I don't think 12 year old kid playing a game rated for 13 year old kids is something you could bring people to court. you seem to think that the person making the account is the one breaking the law, when in actuality, it is RIOT breaking the law allowing them to play, while the player may not be brought to court, RIOT themselves are at risk also, as i have pointed out in other comments in this thread, please answer this. if this guy is free to break the age limit set by the ToS, doesnt that mean i am free to break the ToS concerning toxic behaviour? and if not, why not? wouldnt that be a double standard?
: You are not police so calm down man. This topic asks one question but suddenly it's like carnival were everyone is dressed like swat team and try to explain the law... Honestly any online game is bad influence to kids. Still only having access to internet let's the kids see anything they want which if far worse than a normal game where worst thing is people that can say mean things.
> [{quoted}](name=GrìmoreWeiss,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=6caWJkAA,comment-id=0000000300000001,timestamp=2019-07-07T20:31:48.429+0000) > > You are not police so calm down man. where did i claim i was the police? >This topic asks one question indeed, and i answered that question (how do i stop my brother facing smurfs) by saying maybe he shouldnt play the game, considering the ToS says he shouldnt be playing... > but suddenly it's like carnival were everyone is dressed like swat team and try to explain the law... all i said was that the law exists (and RIOT are breaking it by 'allowing' >13yr olds to play) i wasnt trying to explain anything... > Honestly any online game is bad influence to kids. Still only having access to internet let's the kids see anything they want which if far worse than a normal game where worst thing is people that can say mean things. so you say any online game is a bad influence, then in the same sentence say its 'ok' because there are 'worse things that the kids could be doing' isnt that a complete contradiction?
Adama (EUW)
: So many people that dodge queues.
its not so much that they are 'wasting time for everyone in the lobby' its just that, if they wait and someone else dodges they dont get the LP or time penalty for dodging themselves, so they wait as long as possible to give other potential dodgers the chance to dodge. as to your second paragraph, i wholeheartedly agree, it can get very annoying very quickly ><
Fos (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Yraco,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=6caWJkAA,comment-id=000000010000,timestamp=2019-07-07T11:04:57.477+0000) > > The ToS say that you must be 13 years of age and, if you aren't considered an adult, you must have a parent/guardian agree to the ToS. > It's highly unlikely that this will ever actually matter or get them banned though. I mainly asked if it was a joke for 2 reasons and you basically typed the same thing as the other guy's comment. First, the thread is about a guy asking asking for a solution to a problem, the problem being that smurfs ''exist'', the fact that his brother is mentioned in this thread is just a side thing, it's not the issue. Pretty much any 9 year old can make an account clamming that he/she is over 18. So anyone can bypass that. Which brings us to the second reason. Tell me who actually follows any age restrictions in any games? There is no reason for one even to mention this since nobody follows it, and nobody gets punished and why would they? For playing the game? The pocket is more important than the rules.
> [{quoted}](name=Fos,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=6caWJkAA,comment-id=0000000100000000,timestamp=2019-07-07T11:27:15.626+0000) > > > First, the thread is about a guy asking asking for a solution to a problem, the problem being that smurfs ''exist'', the fact that his brother is mentioned in this thread is just a side thing, it's not the issue. > he is asking for help with a problem, yes i would agree, but the problem he is asking about has to do with his brother facing smurfs. his brother, according to the ToS SHOULDNT EVEN BE PLAYING THE GAME... if he follows that rule, the problem suddenly disappears for him... that was the point i was trying to make > Pretty much any 9 year old can make an account clamming that he/she is over 18. So anyone can bypass that. > you know that would be fraud right? > Which brings us to the second reason. > Tell me who actually follows any age restrictions in any games? > just because noone 'follows' the rules, doesnt mean the rules dont exist > There is no reason for one even to mention this since nobody follows it, and nobody gets punished and why would they? For playing the game? > if it is against the law, then yes they (RIOT in this case, not the player) SHOULD be punished > The pocket is more important than the rules. one of those rules is no flaming, am i free to ignore this rule too?
: wait, what are you talking about. Playing games that are over your age is not %%%%ing ILLIEGAL. Just against tos.
i think you misunderstand, its not illegal for the player to create the account, but it is illegal for RIOT to 'allow' under 13s to play, which is why section 1.1 of https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse is there i am not saying the player is breaking the law, i am saying RIOT is by having >13yrs olds playing...
: > [{quoted}](name=Neumím Riven,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=0UwxBgBd,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-07-07T16:14:38.852+0000) > > And? Typical day on internet. If you get mad about this thing you should either avoid this game or track that guy IP an deal with him IRL I'm not mad to be honest, it's just few days ago i responded to some other guy with human manners (No flaming, etc).. you can find the post of chat logs i made, anyways.. how did i get punished and this guy doesn't while using 'Insta-ban' words? that baffles me.
> [{quoted}](name=Snake Expert,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=0UwxBgBd,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-07-07T16:16:32.604+0000) > > how did i get punished and this guy doesn't while using 'Insta-ban' words? that baffles me. except its NOT an insta ban word, and certainly isnt 'zero tolerance' as RIOT would lead you to believe
: %%%%ing LUL I played Tekken when I was 10 wake up pls. It doesnt matter
it kinda does when it breaks the law....
: Lol but this game is PEGI 14 last time i checked, he should play fortnite or smthing that's for 12 yos
really? https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse look at 1.1
: this game is advertised as 12+ in some countries so it makes sense hes 12 and playing and i started as 8 year old but on a different account but it got hacked
i HIGHLY doubt that https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/termsofuse section 1.1 Only people ages 13 or older may create an account or use the Riot Services. If you’re at least 13 years old, but not yet legally considered an “adult” in the country you live in, you must ask one of your parents (or other legal guardians) to read this Agreement and accept it on your behalf. You may not create or use an account or use any of the Riot Services on behalf of a legal entity or for a commercial purpose.
: NEW PLAYERS GETTING FORCED TO GO AGAINST A SMURF
your little brother is 12 and has started playing? you realise this is against ToS right?
M3GTRDragon (EUNE)
: i'm gonna pick mf ap mid against zed every time just to get people like you banned;) Reason: it's not a stupidly bad pick since you can easly harrass him and keep your distance. your only problem is lack of mobility. Also renekton in support is pretty busted when played correctly, but useless when played wrong
> [{quoted}](name=M3GTRDragon,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=AKs9oPZV,comment-id=00020001,timestamp=2019-07-03T12:37:14.914+0000) > > i > > you can easly harrass him and keep your distance. your only problem is lack of mobility. > > how do you keep your distance with a lack of mobility?!?
: Spectate Bug.......
Go to C:\Riot Games\League of Legends\Config and delete the file called LeagueClientSettings.YAML then relog.
: account stuck
Go to C:\Riot Games\League of Legends\Config and delete the file called LeagueClientSettings.YAML then relog. This happened to me a few days ago and doing this worked for me
: 1h45 and 30 min.later it is always 1h45min. Wtf:)))
: Riot shit company
you realise its a beta right?
Flendurs (EUW)
: TFT bug
champions can only be 'played' (or returned to bench) during the preperation phase.
: Human patience has a limit
chat bans are a HUGE contradiction and shouldn't exist imo
: are u sure it´s 30min? we are in queue for 40 now and nothing
what he/she means is, when you press 'play' you are not actually queueing for the first 30 mins of the counter, so in effect if its showing 40mins for you, you have only been in the queue for 10mins
: You clearly havent read what I said and now try to somehow win the argument my mocking with the most ridiculous way. What a pathetic attempt. Go back to kindergarden, child, you dont belong here. >There is no prisoner's island anymore So its just a coincidence that now that Im chat restricted, I have a lot more flamers/afk/inters? Is that what you are saying?
> [{quoted}](name=Android 18 Love,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=Y6XgVBXZ,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-06-08T08:43:47.126+0000) > > > So its just a coincidence that now that Im chat restricted, I have a lot more flamers/afk/inters? Is that what you are saying? YES
: > [{quoted}](name=Conphucius,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZPM3l5pO,comment-id=000000000000000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-30T02:07:17.374+0000) > > 'riot doesh't act upon private messages > > so you AGREE then that there IS an instance where they DO tolerate it then? > > all their policies are only applicable for the public chat > > care to explain WHY? as stated, there IS an instance where they tolerate what they claim to be 'zero tolerance' words, so their insistance that these phrases are zero tolerance is an outright %%%%ing LIE They don't tolerate it. They can't act upon it. Ever heard of the law ? You know, that thing that says Riot can't look at private conversations unless you disclose them ?
thanks for the implication that i am lying about someone telling me to kill myself.... just one question, WHY would i have need to doctor a screenshot for the purposes you state?
: > [{quoted}](name=Conphucius,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZPM3l5pO,comment-id=000000000000000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-30T02:07:17.374+0000) > > 'riot doesh't act upon private messages > > so you AGREE then that there IS an instance where they DO tolerate it then? > > all their policies are only applicable for the public chat > > care to explain WHY? as stated, there IS an instance where they tolerate what they claim to be 'zero tolerance' words, so their insistance that these phrases are zero tolerance is an outright %%%%ing LIE They don't tolerate it. They can't act upon it. Ever heard of the law ? You know, that thing that says Riot can't look at private conversations unless you disclose them ?
'you know that thing that says Riot can't look at private conversations unless you disclose them' well guess what, i DID disclose them, i sent them 2 screenshots of the behaviour AFTER SENDING THEM SCREENSHOTS their response was 'because it was a private chat, we do not have access to what was said, therefore we will not be taking action' 'we do not have access to what was said' YES THEY DO I SENT THEM SCREENSHOTS
: > [{quoted}](name=Conphucius,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZPM3l5pO,comment-id=0000000000000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-29T18:07:27.420+0000) > > so then, they are lying when they say they have a 0 tolerance policy, as there IS a place where it is tolerated, namely private chat. > > i had someone add me last month to tell me to kill myself, to get cancer and to get ebola, at least 2 of these are considered 0 tolerance, and i would hope the 3rd example i have listed is also considered the same, but when i reported the person through a ticket i was told that because it was a 'private chat' between 'friends' they couldnt access it, and claimed to not know what was said, even when i submitted multiple screenshots of the conversation... the guy had also said (vsible in the screenshot) that he was not worried when i told him i would report him, as nothing would be done, the support agent confirmed this and closed the ticket > > TL:DR telling someone to kill themselves is NOT zero tolerance as in private chats its tolerated I mean, it's known that Riot doesn't act upon private message as you added the person in your firendlist... All their policies are only applicable for the public chat.
'riot doesh't act upon private messages so you AGREE then that there IS an instance where they DO tolerate it then? all their policies are only applicable for the public chat care to explain WHY? as stated, there IS an instance where they tolerate what they claim to be 'zero tolerance' words, so their insistance that these phrases are zero tolerance is an outright %%%%ing LIE
: > [{quoted}](name=Conphucius,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZPM3l5pO,comment-id=00000000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-29T17:43:49.840+0000) > > so what does that have to do with the number 0 and the word tolerance? > > to me, 0 tolerance means 'we have NO tolerance whatsoever for what we call '0 tolerance' and therefore any instance of such phrases will be instantly punished, at a harsher rate than 'non-0 tolerance' things' > > would you agree with this definition? Yes. And that's exactly what is described. No warning, straight and direct ban.
so then, they are lying when they say they have a 0 tolerance policy, as there IS a place where it is tolerated, namely private chat. i had someone add me last month to tell me to kill myself, to get cancer and to get ebola, at least 2 of these are considered 0 tolerance, and i would hope the 3rd example i have listed is also considered the same, but when i reported the person through a ticket i was told that because it was a 'private chat' between 'friends' they couldnt access it, and claimed to not know what was said, even when i submitted multiple screenshots of the conversation... the guy had also said (vsible in the screenshot) that he was not worried when i told him i would report him, as nothing would be done, the support agent confirmed this and closed the ticket TL:DR telling someone to kill themselves is NOT zero tolerance as in private chats its tolerated
: > [{quoted}](name=Conphucius,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZPM3l5pO,comment-id=000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-05-29T16:58:48.331+0000) > > that does NOTHING to explain what '0 tolerance' means, all it says is they have a '0 tolerance policy' and that it results in skipping parts of the punishment 'escalation path' but doesnt actually say what '0 tolerance' means > > so i will ask again, what does '0 tolerance' exactly mean 0 tolerance is the fact that they skip steps for certain exceptionnal chatlogs.
so what does that have to do with the number 0 and the word tolerance? to me, 0 tolerance means 'we have NO tolerance whatsoever for what we call '0 tolerance' and therefore any instance of such phrases will be instantly punished, at a harsher rate than 'non-0 tolerance' things' would you agree with this definition?
: > [{quoted}](name=Conphucius,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZPM3l5pO,comment-id=0000000000000001,timestamp=2019-05-29T16:27:43.033+0000) > > would you care to explain '0 tolerance' please No. Riot will do that for me. https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/207489286-Instant-Feedback-System-FAQ-#h1q4
that does NOTHING to explain what '0 tolerance' means, all it says is they have a '0 tolerance policy' and that it results in skipping parts of the punishment 'escalation path' but doesnt actually say what '0 tolerance' means so i will ask again, what does '0 tolerance' exactly mean
: > [{quoted}](name=Tinnywizzard,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=ZPM3l5pO,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-05-29T15:31:16.649+0000) > > oh but it was only for game doesnt seem fair If was only the last straw and you use 0 tolerance words. Guess what, making fun of disabilities like autism isn't fair either.
would you care to explain '0 tolerance' please
Show more

Conphucius

Level 136 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion