Rejection Agreements shouldn't count towards an Upgrade

I'm starting to think people are just rejecting things to get upgrades faster. it's way less work, and with the frequency we're seeing otherwise fine submissions get rejected, it would explain a lot. people can nitpick in here over any potential detail that might be responsible ("oh it's probably because there's a blade of grass blocking the 10 foot sign, maybe move it out the way next time?"), but I'm pretty sure it's pointless if reviewers are just burning through and rejecting everything.


  • Eneeoh-PGOEneeoh-PGO Posts: 674 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If the majority of reviewers ‘rejects everything’ in order to obtain upgrades, aren’t they just going to be rejected in turn? There has been some evidence that groups have popped up in a few places to game the system in favor of their club. Present that evidence and Niantic may take action.

    Barring that evidence, what use is an upgrade if everyone just rejects everything?

    Another hypothesis is that ‘agreement fishers’ bang through their reviews as quickly as possible, upvoting anything that’s clearly on the acceptance list, and downvoting everything else. If this is the case, wayfarers must strive to make ‘clearly acceptable’ nominations. Perhaps this is where we are, now.

    There appears to be another problem: reviewers have their own biases, and supply their own definitions. Then we have parts of Australia plastered with survey marker waypoints everywhere, while rural areas elsewhere cannot get anything accepted because it’s easier to just call everything a ‘farm or private property’.

  • Stephyypooke-INGStephyypooke-ING Posts: 506 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I understand what you’re getting at but having rejections not count towards upgrades would greatly increase the amount of time and reviews between upgrades.

    Currently, half of my reviews are rejections and I don’t consider myself that picky. It’s all the ineligible submissions in the system due to lack of submitter education.

  • Oakes1923-PGOOakes1923-PGO Posts: 419 ✭✭✭✭

    Additionally, nothing would ever get rejected. Folks would simply game the system the other way and EVERYTHING would go through. No one wants that. What we need is Niantic to get off the pot and give us a better review process so its harder for folks to flat out reject something and also alter the voting system so rejections don't lead to easy agreements. It should take jsut as long to reject something as it does to accept something.

    I'll let ya'll hold your breath on that one though, lol.

  • mrdeadhead-PGOmrdeadhead-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    honestly they should just rip off the systems places like threadless use. make the submissions public and "in review" for like 2 weeks or a month; let way more people view, rate, and [optionally] comment on the various parts of it as well as the overall score; aggregate the scores at the end of review; either accept, reject, or return it to whoever submitted it with all the feedback from comments they should need to resubmit it more successfully. get rid of upgrades altogether, making submission a way more straightforward process. all Niantic would have to do is monitor for users just slamming out big numbers of nothing but 0 or 5☆ ratings, and respond to reports of users. because if all the reviewer comments are public, then the whole wayfarer community can exercise a degree self-policing to assist moderators, or call official attention to widespread misunderstandings of criteria. the whole "here's wayfarer and there's the forum for it waaaaaay over there" setup is busted, and was archaic like a decade ago.

  • LukeAllStars-INGLukeAllStars-ING Posts: 4,625 Ambassador

    Sorry but if this would happen, Id quit Wayfarer. In Germany, you do everything correct if you partly reject 10 nominations in a row. Not giving agreements to rejections would take down the whole system. Also, this would lead to massive "we accept everything" abuse.

    There should be a possibility that chosen wayfarers could work as "supporters" and re-review rejected nominations, which should clearly be accepted. This would be way better than a change to the whole system.

  • mrdeadhead-PGOmrdeadhead-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    wait you're required to reject parts submissions? shouldn't that come about as a natural result of just thoroughly reviewing submissions?

    and the supporter thing sounds fun until it's just more work for certain people who still aren't getting paid for any of this.

  • LukeAllStars-INGLukeAllStars-ING Posts: 4,625 Ambassador

    Of course, it is based on the natural reviewing process. But Germany had early access to wayfarer, so there were less information and interest at this time. Many of the bigger German cities are in no-priority areas (mine needs over two years) and slowly, the trash they submitted at the early days of Wayfarer in Germany is peaking out. Those are my last reviews:

    Additionally, Germany got no Streetview, so "mismatched" is a quite common rejection reason. Also, Germany is full of fakes based on the low possibility to prove that nominations are fake.

    Based on the low education of the beginning, the still holding trash, and the lack of Streetview in Germany, you are rejecting way more than approving.

  • SlicedPeas-INGSlicedPeas-ING Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭

    Nail on the head. If you want to play a game where "taco bell drivethru lol" is the most common stop, that's what you would get.

  • mrdeadhead-PGOmrdeadhead-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    I'm not saying the majority, I'm saying there's enough. most users actually do want to put time into properly reviewing submissions. which is why their submissions probably will go through.

    and present the evidence? hahaha yea I'll get right on that with all the wayfarer data I don't have access to.

    Niantic might be able to crowdsource locations, but they'll have to actually do some work on their own every once in a while to maintain it

  • mrdeadhead-PGOmrdeadhead-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    and some folk live in areas where "Taco Bell Drive Thru" is the only thing approaching a reasonable nomination for miles. get off your high horse.

  • SubDude596-PGOSubDude596-PGO Posts: 21 ✭✭

    Well, I consider myself a fair minded person and objectively look at all nomination I am reviewing that way. My rating is Great with Niantic. Bu to address your point there are a ton of nominations that need to be rejected as they clearly don't meet criteria. Submitters are the one really trying to game the system. Yes, I'm sure there are some reviewers that try and game too but nowhere near to the extent of submitters. And there are a lot of submitters that just don't know what the criteria is. To combat the problem Niantic needs to have some kind of training for submitters before they are allowed to submit and if too high a percentage of a submitters submissions get rejected then they lose the right to submit until they finish some kind of a cooldown and go through training again. If they lose the right to submit too many times they lose it completely. But to just say rejections shouldn't would be wrong as there are way to many submissions that need to be rejected.

  • BattleTARDIS-PGOBattleTARDIS-PGO Posts: 46 ✭✭✭

    The reality is, the quality of nominations has declined rapidly since they dropped the standards to allow people to submit nominations. A little over a year ago I hardly ever gave a 1*. Now I go from one garden gnome in front of someone's house to another.

  • Thor3381-INGThor3381-ING Posts: 219 ✭✭✭

    I would love to accept 95% of all things I get to review.

    But in reality this is impossible, I depend on the stuff the others nominate. I cannot help it that submitters send in things that are on private property, on wrong locations, unreachable, inelligible. (I just got to review a nomination for a primary school, not something on school property but realy the school itself)

    Reviewers can also get bored when submitters just submit everything they see in order to get another pokestop (and yes, sometimes they beg for a pokestop in the additional info) Give high quality nominations to the reviewers and they will be happy to accept them.

    Maybe they should create a submitters rating as well, submitters with a high acceptance-rate can do more submists, the ones with lower acceptance rate will be limited to fewer submissions

  • purplepopple-INGpurplepopple-ING Posts: 189 ✭✭✭

    If that was the case, I would have a hard time ever getting upgrades. I keep finding people in small towns submitting heraldy on their homes, art painted on their garden walls, and things on the end of their driveways. I also have been getting schools, cemeteries and water plants behind gates.

    That doesn't even get into the move requests, which 90% are reported as abuse because they contain explicit requests to move POIs to free up cells.

    I would really prefer to have more acceptances than rejections (currently around 1:2) as it would be more motivating to review higher quality places.

Sign In or Register to comment.