Quit hating on Riot's response

#1

cloudberry

Riot comes out with their statement about sinatraa on March 10th, 2021.

For a very long time, people have been ridiculing this statement. People have talked about how this was a poor approach from Riot, how this was very unfair to the player involved, and how they should have handled things entirely differently.

On May 18th, 2025, which is today, Riot comes out with a statement about florescent which fixes the vast majority of the issues the community had with the statement about sinatraa four years prior, the biggest ones being a) referring to the player in question by name and b) launching a full investigation prior to taking consequential measures, such as suspensions.

The community response: why isn't florescent getting the same treatment as sinatraa? Why aren't we naming the player being investigated in the official statement? The community is choosing to protest the exact changes they've been asking for.

If you're one of the ones protesting: what the heck do you want them to do? Is this not exactly what you asked for?

I genuinely can't comprehend the community around VALORANT esports at times.

#2

cameran

-14

Frags

+

–

agreed

#16

Hynix

38

Frags

+

–

We're pretending like it's JUST sinatraa. It wasn't.

sinatraa was named.
Chet was named (for much less).
Juvenile was named.

Improvements may be just; exceptions are not.

#19

xineFso

8

Frags

+

–

The girl that was suspended as SA from teabagging in valorant as well

#29

MrHyphon

0

Frags

+

–

Juvenile was guilty tho no?

#33

Hynix

9

Frags

+

–

so is molestcent??

#41

MrHyphon

0

Frags

+

–

Oh she is? That’s my bad then if she is

#44

bennywashere

-3

Frags

+

–

you got proof it happened or are you gonna take up some shoddy screencaps and 2 inconsistent stories w no real evidence? 🧐

#48

zhongZHI

1

Frags

+

–

some who saying this evidence shit now jumped the gun pretty fast about flashback

#57

Hynix

2

Frags

+

–

insert really passive aggressive post that misinterpreted original intention

#59

zhongZHI

-1

Frags

+

–

no im saying that the same people who were instantly saying flashback was guilty are now saying that we need to have evidence to say flor is guilty. its hypocritical

#60

Hynix

0

Frags

+

–

ok my bad ily<3

#50

kfan4238173

0

Frags

+

–

‘Inconsistent’ is crazy bro..

#62

bennywashere

0

Frags

+

–

reading comprehension skills are cooked

#63

kfan4238173

-1

Frags

+

–

i just think its inconsiderate

#36

chinesesalesmen

0

Frags

+

–

the victim and Florescent were minors at the time, not hard at all to understand

#45

cameran

0

Frags

+

–

thats fair as well 👍

#73

jackb2016

0

Frags

+

–

chet and juvenile already had decisions made about them, which is a KEY difference.

#3

SENfns

2

Frags

+

–

2025 not 2021

#7

cloudberry

0

Frags

+

–

Thanks

#4

luminescience

3

Frags

+

–

It’s already 2025 bud

#5

telegrxm

3

Frags

+

–

welcome to today, may 18 2021

#6

xineFso

5

Frags

+

–

Today is not 2021 lol automatically invalidate the statement

#8

Hynix

-1

Frags

+

–

wasn't it because others outside sinatraa were named before as well? correct if im wrong

#12

SENfns

1

Frags

+

–

this is the 2nd ever case of allegations i believe

#17

cloudberry

0

Frags

+

–

I'm not sure... these are the only two cases I've heard. In any case, though, this is the most recent case where they've had to make a public statement. If they're now making the changes, then isn't that a good thing? It'd be hypocritical to look down on the statement that was made for florescent, at least until another similar case has a statement made about it, at which point it can be determined whether this is a PR fix or an edge case—but frankly, why wouldn't you give them the benefit of the doubt?

#9

31Raven

1

Frags

+

–

i love being in 2021

#10

Big_Potato

12

Frags

+

–

People are hating on riot because they couldnt make a public apology to sinatraa after wrongfully banning him INSTANTLY

#20

cloudberry

1

Frags

+

–

This makes a lot of sense, and I fully believe that Riot should be making an apology statement for sinatraa's case (frankly, it should have been made long ago). However, I think it's unlikely that Riot has the same PR team that handled that case four years ago, and I don't believe it's fair to them to be receiving this kind of backlash for what should be a well-put statement on the matter.

#11

GarbanzoEnjoyer

2

Frags

+

–

also this

https://x.com/TheBubblyBunni/status/1924215781736259842?t=IFADz1WhDmtQGdD0dAp-4A&s=19

#23

cloudberry

3

Frags

+

–

I hadn't thought of that, thanks for bringing it up. These are exactly the kinds of things people fail to consider before being overly judgemental.

Regardless, though, it shouldn't take children's privacy laws for Riot to do the sensible thing when it comes to matters like this, and I hope their PR team continues to make professional statements from here on out

#39

shermie

2

Frags

+

–

The most sensible people have BEEN bringing up the fact that both were minors, and it makes things legally more complex.

People just ignore it because they want more reasons to be mad.

#13

Cerati

0

Frags

+

–

do you like lasagna? i ate lasagna today

#24

cloudberry

0

Frags

+

–

I love lasagne :)
I hope you had a great meal

#26

Cerati

2

Frags

+

–

greaat
p.s: i made the lasagna, i love cook

#27

Weffery

1

Frags

+

–

Get off your alt Garfield you ain’t slick

#51

Cerati

0

Frags

+

–

lmao

#14

shermie

0

Frags

+

–

Because the community is biased, duh.

But also, if Flor did all this when she was an adult, she probably wouldve been named. So I dont really think they've necessarily learned anything lol.

#15

zhongZHI

0

Frags

+

–

its more that people see a correlation rn between being lgbtq and being treated more favourable. when u place side by side sinatraa and flors case. the only difference is their sexuality and riots response. thus people are like seeing this correlation as a causation even if its just riot being smarter seeing i remember during the sinatra case the old ceo was very eager to jump the gun and ig leo wishes to avoid the same mistake.

tldr. people seeing correlation between being gay and being treated more favourably even if its just riot taking better approach

#21

GarbanzoEnjoyer

0

Frags

+

–

you're missing the most important difference, which is that flor was a minor when the alleged events took place

#18

foythvlr

5

Frags

+

–

they want a imaginary enemy to hate and get mad at not actual fairness lol (and that comes from someone who thinks she did it)

#22

Mirage27

1

Frags

+

–

I'm holding off my opinions until this gets goes to trial because accusations made on twitter aren't going to do shit. The only thing I'll say is this is terrible for the VCT scene and the GC to VCT pipeline is basically doomed.

#28

cloudberry

0

Frags

+

–

Agreed. But that's a topic that deserves its own thread, to be honest

#30

Mirage27

1

Frags

+

–

Absolutely and honestly shouldn't even be mentioned until all this is behind us.

#31

GarbanzoEnjoyer

0

Frags

+

–

How is it doomed? Do you think every recruiter thinks all GC players are the same?

#40

Mirage27

0

Frags

+

–

It's just a PR problem. Once one bad thing happens the rest could very easily crumble. Remember, Flor was THE best player in GC for 2-3 years. No one else has come anywhere close to that in GC yet. And as a result of these accusations, It's going to take considerably more work and effort for a GC player to complete to journey to Tier 1.

#58

GarbanzoEnjoyer

0

Frags

+

–

again, why would any recruiter look at say TL bstrdd and think "but what if she ends up being a rapist?"

#65

Mirage27

0

Frags

+

–

Think about it like this. Flor was the first and currently the only player to successfully make it to tier one VCT from GC. Now that these accusations have come to light, the next player that wants to try and make that jump from GC to tier one is now going to be under heavy scrutiny just because this situation exists. You can already see how strongly people's opinions are on this topic all across social media. That kind of pressure is something most orgs are going to try to avoid because it's not smart to take such a big risk when there is a precedent that it has failed.

#68

kingop3n

0

Frags

+

–

that has nothing to do with being a rapist tho. she got into T1 cos she was the best and if ppl want to paint the situation as the best player is a rapist and then make an outlandish claim that all GC players are theyre in the wrong. you have a point in saying that taking the risk w the best player and it ending up not good in terms of actually winning yeah but again it doesnt have anything to do with the actions she took

#69

Mirage27

0

Frags

+

–

This is just my opinion, but the actions one person makes can very easily destroy everything that that person is associated with. In this case, Flor's actions (no matter the result of them) has damaged the reputation of the GC and Valorant scene, especially since Riot preaches inclusivity of all genders and races.

#70

kingop3n

0

Frags

+

–

it will still dmg it somewhat bcos it sucks the best player is not a good person but still

#71

Mirage27

0

Frags

+

–

I would not be surprised if it takes until 2030 for another GC player to make it to tier 1.

#72

kingop3n

0

Frags

+

–

its also just the skill gap anyway is still pretty big. like in ranked its really not but pro play is just different. i love GC and i loved flor i was so happy someone got a chance but its just fucked now. there are a few who definitely could have a chance soon but they arent on a duelist role so its hard for them to be seen and picked up. we gotta wait for the actual verdict but it doesnt look good

#25

yukky

6

Frags

+

–

this isn’t people asking riot to repeat past mistakes.

it’s asking for consistency.

the main issue for a lot of people is that riot usually always names the player when there’s a public investigation, and now suddenly they don’t.

even just using flor’s gamer tag would’ve kept it respectful and clear. if this is supposed to be the improved approach, it shouldn’t come with less transparency.

#34

cloudberry

0

Frags

+

–

I agree that Riot should consistently make good, professional PR statements, but do they not have to start at some point? Yeah, it's a coincidence that florescent happened to be the first of these statements, but until we get another statement-needing case then I'm willing to give the PR team the benefit of the doubt

#37

yukky

1

Frags

+

–

They should start at a point that makes sense, and doesn’t backfire on them

This is not a good starting point at all

#42

cloudberry

0

Frags

+

–

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's been a span of over 4 years since we've gotten a case of this scale. Who's to say the next case will come any sooner than 4 years? If Riot don't make the correct PR moves now, not only would they not get to amend themselves for years, but they'd just receive the same backlash as sinatraa's case in the long term anyway.

#53

yukky

1

Frags

+

–

this rollout wasn’t it and they knew it considering they started hiding tweets that told them to namedrop

you don’t try new things on an investigation as big as this

#55

cloudberry

0

Frags

+

–

I agree that experimentation with this kind of thing isn't generally good, but is hiding tweets like that not what should've been done in any case?

#56

yukky

0

Frags

+

–

no

#75

vo0kashuFan

0

Frags

+

–

No because it comes off as them not trying something new and instead be bias toward flor.

#38

Reimsy

0

Frags

+

–

Publishing the name of an underage criminal suspect before said suspect receives any sort of adult sentence is a criminal offense under Canadian law.

They literally CANNOT legally identify flor in an official statement. (Idk if a gamertag technically counts as identifying personal information, but clearly that's not a risk Riot wants to take.)

#46

yukky

0

Frags

+

–

The gamertag has no personal info

So put the gamertag

#61

Reimsy

2

Frags

+

–

110 (1) Subject to this section, no person shall publish the name of a young person, or any other information related to a young person, if it would identify the young person as a young person dealt with under this Act.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/y-1.5/page-13.html#h-471612

Having just wasted 20 minutes of my time reading Canadian criminal law, if I was the Riot PR person, I wouldn't risk it.

#64

kingop3n

2

Frags

+

–

a gamertag still leads to a person with their full name

#66

targuin

0

Frags

+

–

do you remember any examples?
Quickly going through the major ones I remember, I cant find any others

most cases they either didn't make a statement at all or only named the findings/decision (with player name) after they had concluded their investigation (without announcing the investigation)

Basically from what I can tell its:
action taken -> name (can be combined with an unannounced investigation like with Jayh)
no action taken (investigation) -> no name

#32

NRGSUPERFAN

5

Frags

+

–

Just drop her VCT alias. aint that hard

also forget about the name drop. they haven't even announced an investigation when in sinatraas case, the head of esports at the time announced the news himself.

Dont think its wrong to call out the double standards regarding both these situations but you're also really dumb if you think riot has "learned from the past" resulting in them changing their approach. This is an exception to their normal approach.

#35

SudokuDude

0

Frags

+

–

Yeah, this is why I said this community is mentally not up there.

#43

MissInconsistent

2

Frags

+

–

I think it's just best for everyone to refrain from sharing any of their takes or going past objectively mentioning potential outcomes or conditions. Of course everyone is going to have their own idea about the situation, I do too, it's in human nature to instinctively draw conclusions. But one thing that always happens no matter what is that you can't please everyone, it can be the same people that had problems around sinatraa's case, or it can be a different group of people, but I'd say it's very simple to have an outburst like this especially if you don't know enough about the surrounding factors like whether it's a matter of said person being this or that age, or proof existing/not existing or any kind of other law-based determining factors on how the post is gonna be written. But personally, I just feel like the healthiest approach is realising that it's impossible for any of us to know the full extent, and not comment on things that we don't fully understand. That's what the investigations are for, if there's a public and proven reason why the inconsistency happened and it makes no sense, then of course it's fine to criticise, but it also can make sense and be based on something realistic. P. S. this is also something I don't have legal knowledge about, but at least morally mentioning the gamertag feels like a big grey zone to me because it's still traceable to the specific person. TL;DR: I feel like people hate not being able to take a side so they internally make up reasons why to get mad at any side.

#47

NRGSUPERFAN

0

Frags

+

–

could've pressed enter a few times

but your not wrong

#54

MissInconsistent

0

Frags

+

–

My bad, I haven't written that many forum posts yet, but I'll keep it in mind for whenever I write something longer LOL

#49

cloudberry

1

Frags

+

–

Very fair input

#52

kotchan

0

Frags

+

–

SA enabler what can i say

#67

etrnlghst

0

Frags

+

–

EXCEPTIONS are not the same as AMENDS

#74

H3ENnZ

0

Frags

+

–

i just hate them for making the skins expensive #justiceforexo