what is the consequence of "abuse / fake nomination"
saarstahl-ING Posts: 73 ✭✭✭
I often have cases where I am quite confident that a nomination is fake (normally because there is some mismatch between the aupporting photo and the street/map view), but cannot 100% sure because the evidence is not clear enough. I don't want to get nominators into trouble with a potentially false accusation, so I normally go by the rule "presumed innocent until proven guilty" and give 1 star.
Is this the right approach? How do you handle such cases? And what are actually the consequences for the nomimator of an abuse:fake evaluation?
I'm interested as well, would'nt it be nice to have an option like "i'm not sure, this place exists"? Sometimes it's really not easy to decide if the place exists, or not..
"abuse:fake" is sometimes a really hard choice.
Abusive nomination: first nothing, only time after time, your rating will get lowered. Also, Niantic once wrote, that they might block your WF-account.
Abusive POI ingame deleted: Strike (Niantic got a 3-strike-system)
My review style is that I only choose "fake" as long as I know its fake (knowing the correct location, Photoshopped, etc). Everything else will more likely get a 1* mismatched.
Nothing. People can report nominations for abuse over and over again and nothing will happen, usually. Just see the same nominations over and over again and it never ends ONLY UNLESS it's brought up here where they are able to "take action on the X wayfinders in accordance with their policy."
I see too many nominations of photos of computer screens which drive me up the wall, but it gets rejected and the proceed to do so again, anyway, endlessly. Mind you, I have been getting plenty of explicit content rejections, but there really is no impact to me as of yet. Just annoying rejections.