Is this a policy? No matter how one trolls or ruins the game, moderators never refund it? Its this some god damn conspiracy or something? Why when someone trolls, gets a gt vio, and is suspended there is no Refund? Why no one ever gives refunds, if someone in the game gets a vio??????????
I mean literally, You are giving points to a winning side, that won only because of the troll/gt user :/ And you encorage such gameplay.
Why not for instance... Remove the player with violation Off the Round, and refund the game!
P.S. If someone gets a Violation through a round, i think its just fair, he to be removed from the round. I don't like players that get a GT vio for 24 hours come back after those 24 hours just to throw again.
BUMB. Cos its happening again 20 days later, and nothing changed.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
that was in response to "could be construed as GTing"
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
attention thread: steven has a new avatar.
1
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
that's because it's a relevant problem that causes a bigger headache for the mods then what they need
i remember threads being made on limiting reports being made per day as stupid as that sounds because the scrounging had become such an issue that even forum-goers such as riddler were noticing it while being one of the bigger offenders
the only way to compensate for this it to be harder on report spam or something like that
honestly it's a thought in my mind but a key where you can disable someone from making reports would be splendid.
@ Rutab: If a new player breaks a rule because he did not know the rule existed, they should get a violation because it is expected of them to know the rules by the time they enter a comp game. However since this is still up to moderator discretion, on the offchance that the person gets a verbal warning instead, the verbal warning is basically the same as a violation and could potentially be treated as such and a refund be given.
If you mean, however, that the person made a terribly bad play that everyone that was good would consider as if it were GT, so because they did NOT GT they got a note, that should not be refunded. And thinking that mods should refund mistakes is a terrible line of thought, IMO.
Technically speaking, the precedent should be that "if a rule wasn't broken, no refund" instead of "no violation, no refund". But because I have little faith on mods differentiating between the two examples I gave actually applied, I would much rather keep the no vio-no refund precedent than new mods start refunding mistakes
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
honestly, gamethrowing is the most black and white rule on the rules page. there are two scenarios
a) the player in question had no intention of causing their own or a specific other person's loss b) the player in question had intention of causing their own or a specific other person's loss
i really don't see how this can be any less clear
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
reban xxerox im tired of his trolling
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Thanks for your opinions and clarifications, guys!
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
i think that fundamentally if you agree that a game should not be refunded for bad play and also agree that notes are not vios, there can really be no overlap for refunding notes.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
also what riot said.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
I would personally say no refunds for notes. I mean if you're in a gold heart game then you should be careful and responsible for your actions even if you're new i.e if you violate a rule you should be given a violation.
10
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Refunding games that don't have a vio is asking for trouble.
10
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
If a new player patently and deliberately throws a game then it should not be a note.
If he makes an error that could be construed as GT'ing but probably wasn't, then he should get a note.
11
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
I agree and am quite frankly glad that the rest of you seem to as well.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
maybe i'm a harsh mod who does things harshly, but i rarely give notes in place of vios just because the user is new. if the user GTs and is new, i'm still giving GT. i use notes to note borderline behavior where a user should know better in the future. that's just me though.
literally 6 different people explained the same concept to rutab
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
No, otherwise the meteor is pointless.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
notes are typically mod preference and only to keep track of sketchy behavior that doesn't warrant enough for a violation but possibly would in the future
But what if the new player is actually an alt? Or the first offence is only because his friend is running?
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
But we give notes for rule breaking if it's a newer user and a first offense.
deleteddeletedover 11 years agoedited
notes aren't vios, thus bad play at most.
edit: too lazy to quote your other post, but notes fundamentally mean that a player did not break a rule.
deleteddeletedover 11 years agoedited
No.
And if the player was not given a violation, due to a lack of intent, then no.
10
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
What if the rule is broken and not given because the player is a new player? They received a note, which means they broke a rule, but notes aren't violations. Would it be refunded?
deleteddeletedover 11 years agoedited
Ah yes, while we're at it we'd like to hear about your collective opinions on meteor refunds - specifically: if no one intends to make meteor happen and they aren't sufficiently warned about the consequences, should the game still be considered for a refund, despite not resulting in a violation? We've generally stood by no refund no violation in this matter, and I have a feeling that you guys will agree.
