But most of those, particularly the playgrounds, statues/sculptures and sports fields, are definitely eligible. The wall art depends on whether the building is a single-family home, but none of them have "private residence" as a rejection criteria, so there's definitely something weird going on here. I really don't know why you decide to focus on something that's certainly not the point being discussed.
Because it's what we always do here in the forums whenever someone is complaining about unfair rejections... It's a unwritten rule that in these cases someone must first come and doubt their eligibility. Good thing we are past this phase, now we can discuss the obvious problem that is happening.
Based on my observations, looks like the fakes that were reappearing in Germany are mostly on the area unaffected by this activity, right? I don't see any recent fake reports from Southern Germany, so the fake nominations are possibly rejected as well, in my opinion.
To be precise, is there any new Wayspot created on the affected area?
I see what you're getting at. But if there was some sort of geoblocking going on, wouldn't the rejection reasons be similar and/or wouldn't the rejections be instantaneous? I don't really see the point of setting up a system that gives out (seemingly) random rejection reasons at random times in a geoblocked area.
And today again i received the next four rejections that I submitted 4 days ago. Someone asked how long it took from the queue to the rejection. They should simply undo what they introduced. And nobody needs to come here with any reviewers. Something is wrong in the system and no, I won't justify it, that's the way it is. For this reason, I will not submit any more suggestions and will not evaluate any more suggestions for the time being.
This is almost always the case. Two nominations, literally the same as each other but in different sides of the town village, one gets upgraded and gets rejected, the other approved by the regular queue.
Looking at another subset of nominations which were all submitted twice, when they were initially upgraded, the majority of nominations just ended up being not accepted. Resubmit them and keep the upgrades away from them, they were reliably approved in no time at all. The upgrades cause the rejection, and are often for ludicrous reasons.
It is almost always the same pattern: upgrade something and it is highly to be rejected. Then submit it maybe a month later and keep the upgrades away from it and the confidence interval of approval whips up to almost 100 per cent. I have to reiterate this twice. It makes no sense for us reviews to want to GRlND (or even just review regularly) only to be presented with ridiculous rejections for our efforts.
If Germany/Taiwan are having issues with valid nominations with upgrades being permanently rejected, perhaps we ought to revisit the concept of upgrades again as per @Euthanasio2-PGO's question:
For me it doesn't matter whether there is an upgrade or not. In the meantime, my suggestions no longer make it to the upgrade because they have been rejected beforehand.
There have been a few valid candidates who have come into play lately, but you can't compare that from before. There were a lot more during the day or during the week.
Looking at what got accepted and what got rejected, the ones rejected would appear to be "Duplicate" signs for the various parks already Waypoints, so that looks like a correct rejection to me.
You're incorrect once again with your brash rejection mindset @sogNinjaman-ING . When the park signs are roughly 300m away from each other, there are standalone enough to be a wayspot. Clearly the local community understands this and have accepted it since. So please keep your rejection mindset away.
The reason I don't bother getting feedback or nomination improvement anymore, certain people truly think they're so high and mighty thinking everything is a "correct rejection" and pounce for reasons to reject.
Parks are a correct rejection? If it was meant to be a duplicate, then it would be duplicated, but as you can probably see (or not), they weren't. Do you not realise what was accepted were already the ones rejected a month or two earlier?
Of course these water pumps are not in general ineligible. This type of pumps was used before and during WW1, to secure the drinking water supply, even if the regular reservoirs and/or conduits were attacked. So they are at public accessible places, even if they are at the edge of properties.
So we hit the next point: PRP is difficult to estimate in Central Europes old town cores. Evrything is narrow, contorted, you often don't have indicators about single or multiple occupancy (but in general the houses in old town cores are in most cases multi occupancy), so that we act according to in dubio pro reo. (When I reject such pumps, then in most cases for mismatched location because of unhelpful supporting pictures, or often they are also at graveyards)
The last pump is nethertheless a rejection imho, but not because of your reasonings. It might be an old pump head, but it seems to be placed only as decoration element and seems to be connected to the regular water supply. So the historical background from above isn't given.
So in the end it's similar to the Brexit-plpz with their crazy postbox discussions. In general worldwide no good candidates, but some of the british ones are historical enough to be acceptable. In the end you need only an experienced eye to distinguish these cases ....
First of all ..... please don't lead the discussion to false rejections worldwide.
This seems to be a regional problem for southern Germany. The problem is now out there for (I guess) 3 weeks. We have lots of reports from cells with speedy turnaround times for nominations, or from people using upgrades (like OP). So until now only speedy reviewing processes involved in this. And hopefully Niantic can fix this, before this problem gets enough time to hit the long lasting nominations, too. This would be very frustrating for lots of people, that usually wait over a year for results ....
We don't have reliable reports from Northern Germany (where the cells are usually very speedy, since the population is very dense, and then there is the coastline, that also helps to speed up these regions). So .... only the southern half of Germany.
Further: it's totally misleading, if you want to check, whether there are new wayspots somewhere created, or not.
These hypothetical cabals/bot-networks/whatever are only our most likely explanation at the moment. Whatever it is, but these cheaters are only a small part of the reviewers. So if you are lucky and don't get them involved in reviewing your candidates, you might be lucky.
Why do people this?
German organized wayfarer community does the same thing way around: we have black list of (current state) 80 towns, that were famous for different types of faking. We request, that people accept things there, only if the location is clearly proven - so no 3* on location. If you have doubts -> 1* mismatched/fake.
Maybe some cheaters do this way around. Accept only at their bunch of towns, reject evrything else.
Filtering this automatically should be easily possible. rumours about reviewing bots are very old, they existed back in OPR times. Further there are also plugins, that allow groups of players to organize their submissions as a group. Put them together ....
Are there really faker networks?
Yes. I know about the existance of two. We have lots of fake towns, that are all in the region Allgäu: Leutkirch, Aitrach, Kempten, .... these are a few of our very oldest entries of our fake list, and they are connected. There was a big group of PoGo players, that created ING-accs to submit their fakes long before PoGo-submissions and wayfarer were a thing.
Second region, where lots of fake towns are nearby, is the far north west, towns like Lingen(Ems), Meppen, .... I heard about cabals from there often.
Btw.: Both stories included doxing against fake hunters...
Hello all! We are looking into the mass rejections of nominations that appear to be valid. We'll comment back as soon we dig up any findings during our investigation.
What always confuses me about the reject bots/cabals is, if you're rejecting everything, your own stuff will get rejected. Surely it would be better for them (not for niantic of course, but neither is auto rejecting) to accept everything
Probably more people mass rejecting than bots, but if you have people only selecting 1 star and a random rejection without even looking, you would probably run the risk of rejecting people who are also mass rejecting .... if I've explained that correctly lol
There are two possible explanation. They could have a code which indicates the nominations which should be accepted or they review for a certain time period only and then they nominate their POI.
@Xmacke7x-ING They wouldn't even need a code. They could just forward their email notification for submissions to a central source then use that to feed data to a browser plugin. Doing that would let them auto-approve their own stuff and auto-reject everything else in a completely automated manner.
Any news on this? Just got a post office In Southern Germany rejected for "Location Inappropriate", "Low Quality Photo" and "Orientation" which are all absurd.
Wish there was an option to report malicious reviewers for just making up bogus rejection reasons.
This is the reason for me to quit reviewing here on wayfarer. It can't be that a lot of folks (like I did) take this very seriously and spend good effort in every spot just to find your own submission rejected by funny and random reasons. I care less about the spot but the system is ill and I don't like it.
I would like you to stop appealing only in the form and conduct a former examination by a judge who corresponds to the standard. If you look at Twitter, there are disastrous answers that say that I will judge by this standard regardless of the standard. Isn't it possible that no one will judge in such a system?
Outrageous that wayspots like these get accepted while legit ones get mass rejected. @niantic Please permanently ban the submitter and anyone who rated that as a good wayspot.
Comments
But most of those, particularly the playgrounds, statues/sculptures and sports fields, are definitely eligible. The wall art depends on whether the building is a single-family home, but none of them have "private residence" as a rejection criteria, so there's definitely something weird going on here. I really don't know why you decide to focus on something that's certainly not the point being discussed.
Because it's what we always do here in the forums whenever someone is complaining about unfair rejections... It's a unwritten rule that in these cases someone must first come and doubt their eligibility. Good thing we are past this phase, now we can discuss the obvious problem that is happening.
It's indeed hard to understand the motivation.
Anyway, It should be pretty easy for Niantic to gather data to check if something out of ordinary is happening there.
there is no botnet.
Based on my observations, looks like the fakes that were reappearing in Germany are mostly on the area unaffected by this activity, right? I don't see any recent fake reports from Southern Germany, so the fake nominations are possibly rejected as well, in my opinion.
To be precise, is there any new Wayspot created on the affected area?
Someone can use the New Ingress Portals bot on Telegram to check if new portals are being added in a specific area.
I see what you're getting at. But if there was some sort of geoblocking going on, wouldn't the rejection reasons be similar and/or wouldn't the rejections be instantaneous? I don't really see the point of setting up a system that gives out (seemingly) random rejection reasons at random times in a geoblocked area.
And today again i received the next four rejections that I submitted 4 days ago. Someone asked how long it took from the queue to the rejection. They should simply undo what they introduced. And nobody needs to come here with any reviewers. Something is wrong in the system and no, I won't justify it, that's the way it is. For this reason, I will not submit any more suggestions and will not evaluate any more suggestions for the time being.
I'm tired of it. It is frustrating
Hear ye, hear ye!
This is almost always the case. Two nominations, literally the same as each other but in different sides of the town village, one gets upgraded and gets rejected, the other approved by the regular queue.
Looking at another subset of nominations which were all submitted twice, when they were initially upgraded, the majority of nominations just ended up being not accepted. Resubmit them and keep the upgrades away from them, they were reliably approved in no time at all. The upgrades cause the rejection, and are often for ludicrous reasons.
It is almost always the same pattern: upgrade something and it is highly to be rejected. Then submit it maybe a month later and keep the upgrades away from it and the confidence interval of approval whips up to almost 100 per cent. I have to reiterate this twice. It makes no sense for us reviews to want to GRlND (or even just review regularly) only to be presented with ridiculous rejections for our efforts.
If Germany/Taiwan are having issues with valid nominations with upgrades being permanently rejected, perhaps we ought to revisit the concept of upgrades again as per @Euthanasio2-PGO's question:
I got a fake one that went through today in my area (Southern Germany), which got a lot of legit submissions rejected otherwise:
https://intel.ingress.com/intel?ll=48.778873,11.410223&z=17&pll=48.778873,11.410223
To be fair, it seems that there are still some legit wayspots appearing every now and then.
For me it doesn't matter whether there is an upgrade or not. In the meantime, my suggestions no longer make it to the upgrade because they have been rejected beforehand.
Here is an example an look at the timestamp:
I have now checked the area around me, but there is only one fake wayspot that has appeared in the last few days.
There have been a few valid candidates who have come into play lately, but you can't compare that from before. There were a lot more during the day or during the week.
Looking at what got accepted and what got rejected, the ones rejected would appear to be "Duplicate" signs for the various parks already Waypoints, so that looks like a correct rejection to me.
You're incorrect once again with your brash rejection mindset @sogNinjaman-ING . When the park signs are roughly 300m away from each other, there are standalone enough to be a wayspot. Clearly the local community understands this and have accepted it since. So please keep your rejection mindset away.
The reason I don't bother getting feedback or nomination improvement anymore, certain people truly think they're so high and mighty thinking everything is a "correct rejection" and pounce for reasons to reject.
Parks are a correct rejection? If it was meant to be a duplicate, then it would be duplicated, but as you can probably see (or not), they weren't. Do you not realise what was accepted were already the ones rejected a month or two earlier?
Of course these water pumps are not in general ineligible. This type of pumps was used before and during WW1, to secure the drinking water supply, even if the regular reservoirs and/or conduits were attacked. So they are at public accessible places, even if they are at the edge of properties.
So we hit the next point: PRP is difficult to estimate in Central Europes old town cores. Evrything is narrow, contorted, you often don't have indicators about single or multiple occupancy (but in general the houses in old town cores are in most cases multi occupancy), so that we act according to in dubio pro reo. (When I reject such pumps, then in most cases for mismatched location because of unhelpful supporting pictures, or often they are also at graveyards)
The last pump is nethertheless a rejection imho, but not because of your reasonings. It might be an old pump head, but it seems to be placed only as decoration element and seems to be connected to the regular water supply. So the historical background from above isn't given.
So in the end it's similar to the Brexit-plpz with their crazy postbox discussions. In general worldwide no good candidates, but some of the british ones are historical enough to be acceptable. In the end you need only an experienced eye to distinguish these cases ....
First of all ..... please don't lead the discussion to false rejections worldwide.
This seems to be a regional problem for southern Germany. The problem is now out there for (I guess) 3 weeks. We have lots of reports from cells with speedy turnaround times for nominations, or from people using upgrades (like OP). So until now only speedy reviewing processes involved in this. And hopefully Niantic can fix this, before this problem gets enough time to hit the long lasting nominations, too. This would be very frustrating for lots of people, that usually wait over a year for results ....
We don't have reliable reports from Northern Germany (where the cells are usually very speedy, since the population is very dense, and then there is the coastline, that also helps to speed up these regions). So .... only the southern half of Germany.
Further: it's totally misleading, if you want to check, whether there are new wayspots somewhere created, or not.
These hypothetical cabals/bot-networks/whatever are only our most likely explanation at the moment. Whatever it is, but these cheaters are only a small part of the reviewers. So if you are lucky and don't get them involved in reviewing your candidates, you might be lucky.
Why do people this?
German organized wayfarer community does the same thing way around: we have black list of (current state) 80 towns, that were famous for different types of faking. We request, that people accept things there, only if the location is clearly proven - so no 3* on location. If you have doubts -> 1* mismatched/fake.
Maybe some cheaters do this way around. Accept only at their bunch of towns, reject evrything else.
Filtering this automatically should be easily possible. rumours about reviewing bots are very old, they existed back in OPR times. Further there are also plugins, that allow groups of players to organize their submissions as a group. Put them together ....
Are there really faker networks?
Yes. I know about the existance of two. We have lots of fake towns, that are all in the region Allgäu: Leutkirch, Aitrach, Kempten, .... these are a few of our very oldest entries of our fake list, and they are connected. There was a big group of PoGo players, that created ING-accs to submit their fakes long before PoGo-submissions and wayfarer were a thing.
Second region, where lots of fake towns are nearby, is the far north west, towns like Lingen(Ems), Meppen, .... I heard about cabals from there often.
Btw.: Both stories included doxing against fake hunters...
Hello all! We are looking into the mass rejections of nominations that appear to be valid. We'll comment back as soon we dig up any findings during our investigation.
Thanks for looking into this.
Thank you @NianticGiffard
What always confuses me about the reject bots/cabals is, if you're rejecting everything, your own stuff will get rejected. Surely it would be better for them (not for niantic of course, but neither is auto rejecting) to accept everything
But they won't get rejected if they are the ones who are rejecting. Surely they would pass their nominations and not reject them.
Probably more people mass rejecting than bots, but if you have people only selecting 1 star and a random rejection without even looking, you would probably run the risk of rejecting people who are also mass rejecting .... if I've explained that correctly lol
Thank you :D
There are two possible explanation. They could have a code which indicates the nominations which should be accepted or they review for a certain time period only and then they nominate their POI.
@Xmacke7x-ING They wouldn't even need a code. They could just forward their email notification for submissions to a central source then use that to feed data to a browser plugin. Doing that would let them auto-approve their own stuff and auto-reject everything else in a completely automated manner.
Any news on this? Just got a post office In Southern Germany rejected for "Location Inappropriate", "Low Quality Photo" and "Orientation" which are all absurd.
Wish there was an option to report malicious reviewers for just making up bogus rejection reasons.
This is the reason for me to quit reviewing here on wayfarer. It can't be that a lot of folks (like I did) take this very seriously and spend good effort in every spot just to find your own submission rejected by funny and random reasons. I care less about the spot but the system is ill and I don't like it.
I would like you to stop appealing only in the form and conduct a former examination by a judge who corresponds to the standard. If you look at Twitter, there are disastrous answers that say that I will judge by this standard regardless of the standard. Isn't it possible that no one will judge in such a system?
Outrageous that wayspots like these get accepted while legit ones get mass rejected. @niantic Please permanently ban the submitter and anyone who rated that as a good wayspot.