What are the incentives for reviewers?
Sweetpea101417-PGO
Posts: 7 ✭✭
Hi all,
New level 38 pogo player here. I have read through the guidelines several times and so far, 1 out of my 6 nominations has been accepted. What are the incentives for reviewers to not accept nominations? Why not lean towards more stops, especially in rural areas with few already around?
I live in a small village in Germany and my most recent nomination of a coffee shop with a post office inside was rejected. There are not many stops around and it is sapping my motivation to play when my nominations within guidelines are rejected.
Comments
At least you asked for more stops by normal means. Across the country, there are more fake Wayspots that keep getting approved, and it's possible that your nominations were rejected by them.
I'm not sure of incentives for rejecting stuff aside from the agreement points that go towards the badges/medals on Ingress & PoGo, and the upgrades for nominations.
NIA have previously said in the past that the objective isn't to have loads of wayspots, but to try have ones that are interesting, unique, etc. The issue with the "more wayspots" mentality is that you end up with a situation like here in the UK where you end up having 30 postboxes in one town as wayspots, with very little to differentiate between them aside from the Royal Cypher (the letters) on the front.
Rural communities do suffer from a lack of wayspots, but that's not a reason to lean towards having more wayspots for the sake of density. NIA have recently changed the criteria so that coffee shops can be eligible, but it is up to the submitter to explain why it's a local hotspot or something special. I've seen a lot of cafes and fish and chip shops submitted here in the UK and so many have the most basic description, like "local chippy that has been here years" with a supporting statement along the lines of "we need more wayspots" - neither of which tells a reviewer why that particular location is a local hotspot, something special, etc.
Personally speaking, a coffee shop with a post office is something I've never heard of, so I would be inclined to at least 3* it, as opposed to outright rejecting it but it will be a while before a lot of reviewers are aware of the criteria changes (a lot don't even know the forums exist, so unless they're explicitly told, they won't know about any criteria changes).
If you truly feel that the coffee shop you mentioned is worthy of being a wayspot, then my advice is to try again. I know it's disheartening when a nomination that is eligible gets rejected - I've been there with a book shop that's housed in a Grade 2 Listed building that was used a coaching lodge in the Georgian era and still maintains its original architecture. It was rejected 4 or 5 times before it was finally approved. Basically, don't let the rejections grind you down, and just tweak descriptions where possible and be sure to utilise the supporting statement to explain why you feel it meets criteria.
The only incentives for reviewers are the upgrades, which mean that the submissions go into voting, but in many people's experience, are more likely to be rejected. There are people who speculate that it takes less agreements for a rejection than an approval and then spam rejections to get more agreements. There are also people who have more negative views and look for a reason to reject.
My incentives for reviewing are that it's fun and it allows me to be a virtual tourist for a while and see cool new stuff that I probably wouldn't otherwise encounter. I enjoy working to make the wayspot database better.
Upgrades provide zero motivation for me. I almost always have ten unused ones and I've never fallen below eight.
Thanks for all your thoughts. I can see how the mailboxes in UK would be annoying. I guess my final thought would be to push for less subjective criteria. When I’m reviewing there is a 95% chance that I’ve never been to that area. It shouldn’t be up to the submitter to “sell” me on a submission. Also, we have waypoints at the cemetery here and every informational sign is a waypoint. I’m glad if you find those interesting places, but they aren’t places I would normally visit. More objective criteria would help ease my original frustrations.
@Sweetpea101417-PGO I completely disagree with you-- the job of a submitter is to provide reviewers with all of the information that they need in order to understand the submission. If someone submits a memorial plaque, for example, they should make the effort to explain who the memorial is for and what contributions that person made to the community.
I wrote a long article about exactly that recently: https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/9890/how-to-submit-things-that-get-accepted
I read your post when it came out. It was very helpful. For marginal nominations, it can make sense to rely on “salesmanship”. I would like to see more, “This is a public playground, playgrounds are allowed.” “This is a post office, they are allowed” categories and acceptance.
Also, memorial plaques cost a lot of money. If the city or some individual spent that money, I’m ok with assuming that it is probably important enough to be a waypoint.
@Sweetpea101417-PGO The vast majority of memorial plaques are purchased by family or friends, and they are roughly, "For Uncle Bob, who loved walking his dog in the park." Those don't come anywhere near the threshold for being a noteworthy member of a community. According to this, you can get memorial plaques added to benches for as little as a few hundred dollars. https://www.verywellhealth.com/how-to-memorialize-a-****-memorial-benches-1131904
I think that is a lot of money. And the rules prohibit wayspots on private property, so if it’s in a public park or something, they had to coordinate with someone in government. My going in assumption when reviewing would be noteworthy, especially in a small community.
Again, playing in a rural area can be frustrating. I would like to see Niantic push for more wayspots. Perhaps a minimum of 1 per 500m2 or something. I thought they want build a 3D map of the world.
100% this.
Just to add to this:
Given how common these plaques are and that they are often nothing more than a mini-memorial to a person, the context of the original guidance should still be considered. Where they should only be acceptable for notable figures.
"A lot of money" is relative to each person. What might be a lot to one person, isn't worth much to others (especially when it comes to honouring their friends/family).
Numerous times Niantic have said that they want to see better quality nominations, rather than simply having more nominations.
@Sweetpea101417-PGO Gravestones start at around a thousand dollars and go up from there-- fancy ones can be $5-10K.. It's easy to imagine that if Uncle Bob was cremated the family might take the money for a fancy gravestone and get a memorial bench instead. As @oscarc1-ING said, many cities and organizations have programs for doing this, since it's a win-win situation. The city/organization gets money, and the family gets a public memorial for a family member.
Speaking for myself, I will reject an eligible nomination if the nominator could not trouble themselves to take a decent picture or write a description that makes sense. I recently rejected a church because the title was, " CHURCH" and the description was, "Because its a church." That actually happened. My main point is if it is worth nominating, it should be worth nominating with a decent picture and description. Most of my nominations have been accepted. I don't know if it is because I do these things, or because I only nominate things that I feel have value of some kind to the community that I live in. When I take the pictures or write the descriptions I try to imagine how it will look when someone spins the pokestop or gym, or how it will look when people are exchanging gifts. I know that to people who play that other game they are just trying to have portals to do whatever portals do, but pokestops and gyms represent the things that are special about a community. Something that is worth gathering around for raids or dropping lures in. These things deserve to be presented well, not just haphazardly.
100 reviews for 1 upgrade is a crazy amount of work for the reward. Assuming that each review takes 30 seconds, and that about 1/3 of them won't be an agreement, and that 1/4 of the things you review are edits which don't count towards your upgrade ... that means you need 1.5 hours of labor for one upgrade. And that's conservative. And then about 30% of the time I find I have to resubmit my wayspot because it was inintially rejected for a stupid reason ... causing me to resubmit. (I know the criteria and wouldn't have submitted it unless it was clearly eligible, had a good photo, in the right location, etc.)
Oh, and then to get a cool down (with my excellent rating) when I have the time to actually do some Wayfarer evaluations.
I'm working on a special project to create an Ingress banner along walking paths in my town, requiring a whole lot of new wayspots that are footbridges, tot lots and trail signs to get approved. All together I'm submitting about 100 waypoints. In my area, next to nothing gets approved without an upgrade (I've had quite a few in voting over 6 months without a decision.) I can't wait for my project to be over.
This is insane!
I believe edits now count toward upgrades. When I'm not capped my upgrade counter goes up at a higher rate than my agreements.
yes, it is insane. Thoug Niantic has to priorize places that do not have wayspots.
Still, this doesnt work. My sons and i submitted for a smaller town nearby, and things are not moving forward. People there still cannot play, as none of our submissions have went thru. Personally, i wouldnt even use an upgrade there. Sad for the people, but that is what Niantic has to offer them.