Banned 4 Times on TikTok.
While Riot Backs the Research.
Riot Games reviewed the research and cleared the study under Ticket 123260509. Yet automated third-party moderation bots repeatedly banned my accounts for suspected cheating.
Vanguard does nothing.
TikTok bans overnight.
The fundamental irony of the RGB Project is where the pushback came from. It never came from Riot Games. Riot reviewed the methodology, backed the research, and helped ensure the pipeline operates cleanly alongside live game states without triggering Vanguard heuristics or violating competitive integrity.
Vanguard operates 24/7 at the kernel level. If calling out equipped cosmetics or tracking weapon charms violated game integrity, my Valorant accounts and hardware would have been permanently banned years ago. Instead, Vanguard runs cleanly in every session.
Where the bans actually hit was on TikTok. Short-form video platforms do not employ anti-cheat engineers to inspect memory calls. They run automated heuristic bots that scan video hashtags, audio spikes, and comment section chatter. The moment clips of pre-round loadout calls started racking up hundreds of thousands of views, automated scrapers classified the content as third-party exploit distribution.
"The people who built the anti-cheat cleared the study. An automated algorithm that doesn't understand the game deleted the record."
I reached out directly.
Riot confirmed the absurdity.
Following the initial bans, I reached out directly to my contact at Riot Games to ask if there was any route for developer intervention. He reviewed the account status, confirmed the study remained fully within agreed boundaries, and agreed that the bans were completely absurd from a game integrity standpoint.
Platform boundaries remain absolute. Riot Games builds Valorant. Riot does not control ByteDance content moderation. Under Ticket 123260509, Riot Player Support reviewed the project and cleared the video content. However, Riot has no control over TikTok's automated moderation algorithms. A game studio cannot overturn external social media strikes.
“Riot confirmed the research is clean to publish. The only strict condition: the exact telemetry method stays unnamed so nobody falls for dangerous fake copycats.”
Four automated strikes.
The documented timeline.
118,000 views overnight on my birthday.
A skin trolling clip exploded overnight. Woke up on my birthday to find the account terminated. An automated sweep flagged gameplay tags and wiped the profile with no human review.
Backup handle struck prior to Los Angeles.
Set up a backup handle leading into my visit to Riot HQ in Los Angeles. The automated filter struck the account before new clips were even uploaded, flagging associated device metadata.
Original handle recycled and terminated within 72h.
The original handle became available again in the system, so I re-registered it. Within 72 hours, a teaser trailer containing a public Valorant wiki render of the Riot Gun Buddy triggered another automated ban.
Instant termination under automated policy flag.
A fresh profile created to archive research clips was struck down instantly under the exact same automated policy notice. Platform appeals yielded generic template replies.
Protection over clout.
Why I will never publish the code.
After the fourth strike, the direction was obvious: stop fighting social algorithms and focus entirely on the data. More importantly, keeping the specific mechanics private is a deliberate security boundary.
Whenever skin-reading clips circulate, comment sections fill with sketchy download links, Discord bots, and "custom scripts" promising to replicate the trick. 99% of those tools are infostealers and credential loggers. They are engineered to steal your Riot session tokens, hijack your inventory, and trigger permanent hardware bans.
I gave my word to Riot that the internal telemetry mechanics would never be popularized. Keeping that method unnamed protects players from downloading malware while allowing the documentary findings to stand on their own merit.