Upgrade Rejected for Bogus Reason
Lavalamp27-PGO
Posts: 8 ✭✭
I had an upgrade rejected today for “upside down photo” which was 100% false. How do I appeal and report the reviewer?
Lavalamp27-PGO
Posts: 8 ✭✭
I had an upgrade rejected today for “upside down photo” which was 100% false. How do I appeal and report the reviewer?
Comments
You can't. You can only resubmit your nomination. Each nomination is looked at by a large number of people, so it is unlikely that just one single person entering the "wrong" rejection reason is responsible for it being rejected.
If you want some comments or advice post the full nomination - photo / details / supporting photo and information and location in the "Nomination Improvement" section.
there needs to be a feedback loop to review the reviewers
I highly doubt that is the only reason you were given. And the photo orientation rejection reason includes more than just being upside down, but includes sideways and tilted.
@Lavalamp27-PGO There is a feedback loop-- it's the reviewer rating. If you are mostly review differently than the consensus of the other reviewers your rating will suffer and your reviews will be given less weight in terms of the outcome for the things you review.
That's not entirely accurate. As you say yourself, it doesn't check how good your reviewing is, it compares your reviewing against the consensus. That consensus can be wrong. And a rejection is a rejection. It doesn't matter what reason you chose. You could select live animal without any animal in the picture, and if the consensus is a rejection, you'll get rewarded for it.
Also, you have to vote quite differently from the consensus before your rating suffers. Mostly when people in great rating post their agreement rates, they are somewhere around 65%. That means about 35% of the time, they don't follow the consensus, and yet they still have a great rating. I myself vote actively against the consensus when I know the consensus is wrong, and my rating has never dropped below great as far as I know.
When they added pre-reviewed nominations, that's when reviewers where actually reviewed. But suddenly all kinds of great double onyx all time green reviewers dropped to red rating, and the outrage here was enormous. So great that Niantic quickly decided to partially undo the change.
@TWVer-ING I didn't say it was a perfect feedback mechanism. (-:
Yes, you are correct that there is an implicit assumption built in that the majority of reviewers will do the right thing. We've certainly seen cases where that wasn't true. Right now I think that in some areas there are local groups (I call them cabals) that are working together to decide on each candidate collectively and sometimes/often make their own rules. We see it in places where garbage gets approved because it's someone's couch or desk, in places where trail markers always get rejected because the locals hate them, places where the cabal accepts each other's submissions and rejects anything else, etc.
I don't get as worked up about "wrong" rejection reasons as other people do. I'm not at all confident that Niantic's algorithm for choosing rejection reasons to send in email is solid, and I think there's all kinds of confusion and misinformation because of that. I think they the algorithm generally tries to fill in all of the slots if it can and thus presents noise reasons, and that it would be better to just present one or two "consensus" reasons. Who cares if one person picks misclicks on the reason, or even does it deliberately? A rejection is a rejection.
I was one of those people running at about a 65% agreement rate, onyx recon, never been anything but green/great, and then they added pre-reviewed candidates. I stayed around 65% and have never dropped out of green/great.