Improving the system: Test for nominators
General ideas described in https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/15568/improving-the-system
Test for nominators
Of course we can't go only about bad reviewers, there are so many bad nominations. The first step is that when someone is able to nominate they should be send first to the wayfarer site, they must read the guidelines, criteria, etc... and then pass a simple test that ensures that they don't make basic mistakes. Much simpler than the one for reviewers, focusing on things like "don't request a pokestop", "don't send a picture of anyone", etc... And by all means: In Pokemon Go adjust the nomination screens so they don't ask people "why is this a good pokestop".
Goal: prevent basic mistakes by new users. Don't clog the queue with useless garbage. Prevent frustration by new users that don't understand why it has been rejected.
Agreements on eligible stuff are also easy to get, so it can also leave more space for good nominations, not trash.
Yes, I would love something like that in game. I think new nominators should also see one example of good nomination, with screenshot that show what reviewers see on this nomination - maybe thanks to that some of new players would also undestand that in support photo they need to show safe acces and POI they nominate too.
I really think submitters need to get more information before they start submit, it would really help :) I know it by experience, my friends started making much better nominations after they saw how it look like for reviewers. I think it's a must thing to add in game.
I voted no. A test for submitters has the same problems as the test for reviewers-- it tests a snapshot in time, and there is ample material online now that allows people to cheat. Criteria change constantly, and a one-time test can't keep up with that. Also, memory fades over time.
Instead, I recommend that Niantic provide on-screen guidance during the submission process. This ensures that everyone has up-to-date information in front of them when they submit something. (This should happen during the review process too.)
I think it is a great suggestion and will hopefully get rid of half of the coal in the system. Unfortunately, there will be people who ignore it and submit what they want anyways. I don’t think anyone thinks their face is an eligible submission even without the test.
Another thought, this could maybe hold people accountable. If you take the test and continue to submit blatantly ineligible things, it may give Niantic a leg to stand on saying they took the test and know better.
I don't like the idea of a test for all players who'd like to nominate something. That sounds like the last option to me, I think there are a lot of suggestions that could be tried before it comes to that point. More informations to submitters (most of whom still believe that their submissions are reviewed by Niantic staff, AND that the POIs they've been seeing around for several years were actually approved by Niantic and therefore are a good example of what can be submitted), better guidance (as it has been suggested above). I think these measures would be more effective than a test. If eventually there had to be a test, I truly hope it would be well conceived (not automatically selected among the submissions who reached a strong agreement because it could exclude candidates who have thought too much and realized something that the reviewers didn't see), and I hope it would not suffer the same "2 attempts max" rule because people can learn and improve over the years, and being "excluded for life" sounds pretty severe to me for a participation in a game. Plus as it has been mentioned, it could and probably would be cheated at some point and a bunch of cheaters would pass whereas some honest candidates would not...
I see a submitter test as an absolute basic thing, and doesn't need the fine details of the criteria:
Is this tree a valid wayspot? Yes/No
Is this fire hydrant a valid wayspot? Yes/No
Is this garden gnome on the front lawn of this single family house a valid wayspot? Yes/No
Is this playground in a public park a valid wayspot? Yes/No
With an explanation as to why these are or aren't valid. Trees and fire hydrants aren't suddenly becoming eligible nominations, no matter how the criteria drifts over time.
Just 3 to 5 questions, week long cool down before attempting again, unlimited attempts. It shows Niantic is a bit more serious about the process, and will cut down joke attempts in the system.
Unless we see what this potential nomination test looks like and is not just a random essay or super-quick thing that people just skip through, this will not work. For so long as there are existing nominations that are trash and never should have been approved, people will continue to preach "you should not base eligibility off things that are already in-game" because that is just bad reasoning. People will pass the nomination test, then completely go back off tangent and submit a nice playground called "Place for kids to come after school nice place to relax".
Just like the reviewing test, people will just get others or do as much research to pass the initial test, and then completely vote otherwise. Let me tell you, you put a cafe/restaurant into the Wayfarer review test and I tell you probably 90% of people will fail. It already gives instructions (albeit brief) during the initial nomination process, but for a supporting photo people instead will just take a photo without the nomination. It will not work.
People should not get 7/14 nominations off the bat just by reaching Level 38/10 in Pokemon Go/Ingress. Make it gradual.
I definitely think there should be more information available when nominating, particularly on PoGo, but I can see both sides of the argument. I voted in favour, because overall, I believe there should at least be some sort of introduction, be it a test or an example good/bad nomination. Some interesting points above both for and against.
With regards to those that have voted no:
The aim of this test would be to provide new wayfarers with the background to understand that their nomination will be send to this platform, that other users as themselves will be the ones that will review that, what is the eligibility criteria.
Show them the interface that other people see, it shouldn't be a test designed to exclude people, on the contrary: it should be a welcome to Wayfarer.
No limits on the number of times that they can take the test, but it should be easy enough that they should be ashamed to ask for help in order to pass it
The goal is not to prevent all the bad nominations, that's not possible. The goal is to provide a minimum education about the system so they can understand it instead of the current situation where a new user gets this "superpower" and starts sending nominations and they don't know what's going on.
Click on the nomination guidelines in the app and you'll see there's an immediate issue in how the information is displayed. First of all the first two paragraphs explain that everything is reviewed by the player community and there's a link to the criteria. However the first line is Trainers who've reached lvl 38 can help grow the pokestops. After reading that everyone probably skips straight to bullet point 1 which shows how to actually submit the stops. There's no way someone excited to submit their first location is going to even glance at the criteria link. They've spent so much time barely noticing what the actual waypoints are while playing not like they're going to start caring now.
There should be an introduction course ideally online that walks players through the criteria. It can have a simple test at the end with laughable multi choice questions like what was one of the photos of an object that doesn't meet acceptance criteria (answer - the red ball). Or what will get your nomination rejected (answer - the dash of your car).
I voted Yes. But I struggle with this. I have been trying to educate my locals for a long time. There's some barrier to getting it that I can't figure out. When I first wanted to get involved I was out taking photos of bad submissions and putting them in our discord channel. The expert locals at the time laughed at my submissions which was a bit off-putting but I didn't let it get to me and I asked for an explanation of why it was not a good candidate. They either explained it to me or sent me links to the resources that explained it. That was enough for me to begin the process of figuring it out.
I have tried not to have the same reaction when someone makes a bad suggestion and give them feedback on why the thing they've identified won't pass or how to make it better or where to find the information on what makes a good POI. But not many people seem to want to get over the hurdle of "this won't pass." It's like they are more committed to getting a stop/gym in a specific location rather than finding a good candidate regardless of location. They just want something in their neighborhood. They don't want to add things all over the area for all of us to use.
Try to add an understanding of cell placement on top of good POI and you have a recipe for people quitting before they even begin. The whole thing is way too complicated for those who aren't 110% dedicated to the concept of adding POI. On top of that things just disappear into a black hole because nothing moves in our area without an upgrade but they aren't told that they also need to review to earn upgrades... yeah, Niantic has created a royally screwed up system where more and more junk is piling up and nothing is getting through the system.
The wording in each game submission tab when nominating leaves a lot desired. The wording gives Pokemon GO players the impression it is just reviewed by players of Pokemon Go and not ingress agents hence the overabundance of this will make a good stop or gym. The wording is giving a misleading impression of the target audience who is reviewing the nomination. From being an active submitter I feel like the nominations tabs just drop players into the system to submit. You can read the paragraphs but who is going to take the time to read the tips to nominating a quality waypoint?
The most frustrating thing at wayfarer is that rarely any different or creative nominations get accepted although they meet the criteria. It seems that some reviewers rate most nominations 1 star without even looking at them properly.
If there’s a test, I think it should be a simple test and you can take it as many times as you want until you pass. Also doubles as a good way to introduce people to the wayfarer site and the reviewing process.
I would have voted YES, but I voted OTHER, because although I understand the need for both nominators and reviewers to know the rules well; I prefer, at least for NOMINATORS, a different approach. When a WaySpot is submitted, a short list of check boxes should come up to remind us of the rules and to CONFIRM that this submission satisfies ALL the basic criteria. I have had many, many submissions denied for reasons that were not accurate, e.g. "not publicly accessible" or "not safe to access". So I feel that the reviewer and I, the nominator, both knew the rules well, but somehow the fact that the submission fully complies with the rules and guidelines was not clear to the reviewer - unless the reviewer was somehow biased or heaven forbid, of the opposite faction and voted against it for partisan reasons. I've had a number of portals that were accepted after the second, third or forth try. With almost NO EXCEPTIONS, all of my submissions have fit ALL the guidelines, yet most were rejected. I am very aware of the guidelines and rules and I respect them. I think strongly that stronger acceptance and less suspicion of cheating is in order. Having more acceptance and more WaySpots to play with makes the game much more fun. Let's remember, this is a game, it is not time for puritanism. Yes, let's keep it safe and positive and have a great time learning about our communities.