Wayspot Wrong reasons for rejection
Brukterra-PGO
Posts: 365 ✭✭✭✭
First of all, sorry for the bad English.
I ask myself the following questions and would like to discuss the topic with you - and with Niantic.
1. Why do reviewers decline for wrong or completely pointless reasons?
If you don't know the right reason to reject it, why not at least use "Other Rejection Criteria"?
The player who submitted the wayspots receives completely wrong reasons in the rejection email and does not know what he can do better or what was done wrong.
2. Unfortunately, such cases are currently increasing in the groups in which I am active. Today I saw an example where a playground was rejected on the grounds that it was offensive or the proposal trolled other players. But that was a completely normal playground in the correct place. Today I had a case like this with myself. An information board in the forest with high local importance - which can even be researched on the Internet - was rejected on the grounds that it was a fake ?! The information board is permanent and has been there for many years. I am now concerned that I may. being wrongly flagged and possibly drawing consequences from it.
3. Now I wonder if there will be consequences in the future for people who deliberately choose the wrong reasons?
4. And I also ask myself whether there is a penalty for the submitter from a certain number of rejections with the reason "abuse". Because in my case it was a legitimate wayspot and I don't want to be wrongly flagged or punished.
What are your opinions on this?
Comments
"The player who submitted the wayspots receives completely wrong reasons in the rejection email and does not know what he can do better or what was done wrong."
I think when you get funny rejection, it sometime just means that reviewers dont really care what they are watching in that moment, and they just want to pass it fast and go for the next one, to get an upgrade. For example, I got a not valid nomination the other day. It was the tipical "monument" in name of someone wellknown in the área (sometimes is a plaque, sometimes is a big stone, sometimes is a sculpture,... well, you know). It was in a open garden, by the road. Reason?..... they thought it was a tumb.
When you really dont know what are you voting, and you really dont care you have 2 options: you think it´s valid for sure, and you vote like that, or you are not sure about, and you just regret it. Because wait 20 minutes for a free skip, is never an option, ofc.
I am having similar issues. The reasons for rejection look like a person didn't bother to review.
A motor bookstore is private property? When it is ground floor store or a mixed use apartment?
An office building that's major business inside is the national parks fails because EMT access issue and explicit content? Like what?
It is well documented that the rejection reasons aren't always accurate. This may come simply from misclicks from reviewers when they select the rejection reason. In the past reviewers often selected wrong reasons because the "Doesn't meet criteria" reason required people to type in additional text. That's no longer the case but some people may still be selecting a random reason because they don't know the requirement is gone.
In general, when you get a pile of random-looking rejection reasons the real reason is that reviewers generally didn't think it met any acceptance criteria.
many players who always ask for false proposals until now were never punished
I don't believe in the "misclick" theory, this issue is much, much too common and widespread for that to be the case.
Recently I've read both here and on local forums that people seem to think that the reason behind cooldowns is "voting patterns", and so they advise each other to avoid picking the same rejection reason twice in a row, even if that would be the correct thing to do. As an extreme example, I've even seen people say thay you must alternate between rejecting and accepting nominations to avoid cooldowns, regardless of the eligibility of the PoIs.
People will believe the weirdest things.
@Nadiwereb-PGO It's called Cargo Culting. Someone saw something work one time and they assume it's a general pattern.
Very much this.
Explain the system clearly and people will game the rules. Don't explain it and some people will try to reverse engineer the system to game it or resort to cargo culting. There's no way for us to win on this.
Review coal? Whaaat? I ain't got no idea what you're talking about... °L°
Post Office (in a Kiosk, as it's almost standard in germany, standalone offices are mostly in larger cities) with pointing at criterias in the supplementary info. Refused 3 times now. Even though it has an entry on Google Maps and a Photosphere. Yeah there go my Upgrades...
Wait a second, can we even skip?
Reading this stories is brutal, it's such a shame that our only real option is to keep nominating until we get lucky enough to be paired with reviewers that care a little or untill we get reported for spamming, It's an impossible situation we sometimes have to deal with, hopefully one day soon we'll be able to appeal rejected nominations similarly as we can appeal pretty much every other form of data manipulation. In the meantime I suggest you to keep voicing this issues to raise awareness in the community.
https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/comment/63765#Comment_63765
Tbh if i saw that when reviewing I would reject it based off the fact its dark i. The picture. Take it during day time and you probably wont have a problem