Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules

  • No flaming or derogatory remarks, directly or through insinuation.
  • No discussion, sharing or referencing illegal software such as hacks, keygen, cracks and pirated software.
  • No offensive contents, including but not limited to, racism, gore or pornography.
  • No excessive spam/meme, i.e. copious one liners in a short period of time, typing with all caps or posting meme responses (text/image).
  • No trolling, including but not limited to, flame incitation, user provocation or false information distribution.
  • No link spamming or signature advertisements for content not specific to Dota 2.
  • No Dota 2 key requests, sell, trade etc.
  • You may not create multiple accounts for any purpose, including ban evasion, unless expressly permitted by a moderator.

  • Please search before posting. One thread per issue. Do not create another thread if there is an existing one already.
  • Before posting anything, make sure you check out all sticky threads (e.g., this). Do not create new threads about closed ones.
  • It is extremely important that you post in correct forum section.

  • Balance discussion only in Misc.
  • All art related (such as hero model) feedbacks go to Art Feedback Forum.
  • All matchmaking feedback should go here: Matchmaking Feedback
  • All report/low priority issues should go here: Commend/Report/Ban Feedback
  • No specific workshop item feedback. These should go to workshop page of that item.
  • When posting in non-bugs section (such as this), use [Bugs], [Discussion] or [Suggestion] prefix in your thread name.



In case you object some action by a moderator, please contact him directly through PM and explain your concerns politely. If you are still unable to resolve the issue, contact an administrator. Do not drag these issues in public.



All rules are meant to augment common sense, please use them when not conflicted with aforementioned policies.
See more
See less

What kind of penalty should be given to verbally abusive players?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by erik-the-red View Post
    And before they got in that queue?
    Same as right now, they're allowed to do whatever until the report system flags them as deserving of a penalty.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by brotein View Post
      Where's the option where "DON'T TRY TO FIX SOMETHING IF IT ISN'T BROKEN" or the option that can't be abused by people.
      I talked about it in my original post. This poll is only about the penalty not the report system.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Bleako View Post
        Same as right now, they're allowed to do whatever until the report system flags them as deserving of a penalty.
        Then you haven't addressed my first reply at all: Valve disagrees with your view on mute not being "worthy" of punishment a la LPQ. It seems to me that part of the reason they did this is because LPQ wasn't effective enough in addressing the "toxic community."
        We need a player review system like Overwatch for DotA 2. Get real people to judge communication abuse, intentional skill abuse, and intentional feeding.



        merci fenix

        Comment


        • #19
          If Valve is really so dedicated to this mute system, they could just add an option for you to manually unmute muted players.

          I would be more than willing to deal with whatever "abuse" the player throws my way in exchange for being able to communicate with them in a game heavily dependent on team communication.

          And it could easily turn out that they weren't abusive at all, or they're willing to tone down their abuse (because you could just remute them).

          It's a very simple solution, the only people against it think that the mute system is a "punishment" that has to be suffered by not only the player but his/her teammates.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by erik-the-red View Post
            Then you haven't addressed my first reply at all: Valve disagrees with your view on mute not being "worthy" of punishment a la LPQ. It seems to me that part of the reason they did this is because LPQ wasn't effective enough in addressing the "toxic community."
            I don't get your point. All report systems need time to make sure that a player is truly abusive before handing out a penalty. Whether the player gets muted or sent to LPQ, in both cases the abusive player isn't going to be pissing off new players verbally for long.

            IMO the mute system was implemented because flamers are actually the biggest community-related problem of all moba games, much bigger than trolls, leavers and (legit) feeders combined. Also, flamers don't affect other players' game experience in the same way that the other offenders do: trolls ruin your games while flamers ruin your morale. Therefore, these issues should be handled differently and neither should be ignored (at least IMO).
            Last edited by Bleako; 07-02-2013, 07:38 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Bleako View Post
              I don't get your point. All report systems need time to make sure that a player is truly abusive before handing out a penalty. Whether the player gets muted or sent to LPQ, in both cases the abusive player isn't going to be pissing off new players verbally for long.
              My point is that your view that flaming isn't "bad enough" to warrant LPQ is not consistent with Valve's position.

              IMO the mute system was implemented because flamers are actually the biggest community-related problem of all moba games, much bigger than trolls, leavers and (legit) feeders combined.
              But in other threads (and heck in the OP), you've said things to the effect of "flaming isn't worthy of an LPQ punishment." (In the OP, you said, quote, "I've always said that flamers/verbally abusive players shouldn't get thrown in LPQ (like they used to months ago) for the simple fact that they aren't actually trolls.")

              Now, you're saying that flaming is the biggest problem. So it's the biggest problem, but it's not BAD enough of a problem to warrant LPQ as punishment?
              We need a player review system like Overwatch for DotA 2. Get real people to judge communication abuse, intentional skill abuse, and intentional feeding.



              merci fenix

              Comment


              • #22
                I don't even see why flaming is that important. Why can't any of you move on in your life without crying 24/7?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by erik-the-red View Post
                  Now, you're saying that flaming is the biggest problem. So it's the biggest problem, but it's not BAD enough of a problem to warrant LPQ as punishment?
                  I should've said the most common issue, sorry. It's annoying enough that you see it in every game but not big enough to directly ruin all your games like a feeder troll would... but flaming does have a noticeable impact on your matches nonetheless and it's even worse for new players.
                  Last edited by Bleako; 07-02-2013, 08:32 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    you guys need to stop crying. bans from any legitimate dota 1 league for flaming were way worse than a 24 hour mute. this system is tinkertoys
                    A video about all the whining about mutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ4cqShYork

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      If they ever do a flamer queue punishment with the system actually legit and not abusable... they should put all of them at the top of live games and have both team chats open to spectators.

                      Think of the ratings.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I voted for mute/IP suspend.


                        Personally, I think it would be hilarious to see a Llama command similar to what I saw back in the TFC days;

                        Anytime you tried to say something your chat would be forced into dialogue similar to the calling of a Llama. It was hilarious and very much embarrassing to the one who got 'Llama'd'

                        While it would be humorous to strike back at legitimate flamers, it might not be the best idea (Blatant antagonization). Would still be funny though.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I voted for a flamer queue. I think that provisions to ruin the games of people who ruin games will help people realize how they are affecting others. I would even go one step further and worsen the matchmaking algorithm to intentionally pair these players up with lower skill (also punished) players, but that's just me.

                          Originally posted by F2P View Post
                          If they ever do a flamer queue punishment with the system actually legit and not abusable... they should put all of them at the top of live games and have both team chats open to spectators.

                          Think of the ratings.
                          And have the players (gladiators) reportable to keep them in an endless cycle of torture games? Yes please.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by F2P View Post
                            If they ever do a flamer queue punishment with the system actually legit and not abusable... they should put all of them at the top of live games and have both team chats open to spectators.

                            Think of the ratings.
                            Would even pay to watch it.
                            Рашн летас ар иксидинли кул.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              In all honesty I'd like to see an account suspension. Sure, it forces people to smurf but the muteban causes people to hop on their smurf accounts, too. Needless to say that I would alter my opinion if Valve really decides to keep that automated and abusable bullshit. In that scope, I'd choose "No punishment" because I simply believe that an automated system cannot be a fair judge in regards to human behaviour.
                              Originally posted by biejis
                              I PLAY SUPP AND SHOW WARD ALLGAME, PEOPLE NOT LEARN NOT CHANGE, PLAY DOTA FOR LOSE A GAME

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by erik-the-red View Post
                                And before they got in that queue?
                                Before they implemented LPQ for verbal abusive, they manually threw out permanent mute punishments. And before that they revoked beta access of (really big) flamers.

                                Originally posted by Kettarienne View Post
                                Would even pay to watch it.
                                Agree with that. As long as I only watch it, it would be really entertaining :P

                                OT: I think it's not a good idea to make it multiple choice.
                                Last edited by Typhox; 07-03-2013, 05:06 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X