Would it be reasonable to give multiple rejection reasons for one submission?
Hosette-ING
Posts: 3,470 ✭✭✭✭✭
I've been reviewing a lot of hopeless stuff, some of it exact repeats of things I've seen before, and I've been thinking about how to reduce the burden on Wayfarer for stuff that really has no hope of passing.
I just ran across something that was completely non-qualifying (a road sign) that had game-specific language in the description and had someone's dog in the photo. I always have a dilemma when I encounter something like this-- which of several legit reasons should I choose? Other rejection criteria is a weird catch-all that doesn't clearly tell the submitter that their candidate was rubbish. Text / title or description and photo / live animal suggest that maybe they can just fix those things and resubmit, which clogs up the system with hopeless reviews. This isn't an isolated incident... I've seen several other things like this today.
Would it make sense for reviewers to be able to choose an optional second reason? I'm not sure if it would help, but I feel like anything that provides good feedback to submitters might be an improvement.
Comments
I had one of those cases today - a rather boring sign for a doctor's office, with supporting info which loudly declared that the submission did not in any way block emergency services. I can only assume that this candidate was submitted before and rejected for Emergency Services reasons - that's not why I rejected it, but there's no "meets no known and published eligibility criteria at all" reason besides Other so I don't think there's any way to provide meaningful feedback that would get this person to stop submitting this thing and move along to another candidate, so I expect to see it again.
I would love to be able to select more than one rejection criteria!
The whole interface could do with a complete overhaul. The nominator needs to know If this type of POI is eligible or not, and if it is eligble but not acceptable that needs to be made clear, for example it blocks emergency services or there is something wrong with their nomination (such as photo not good enough, text cut and pasted from the internet, insufficient information etc).
These are all separate and distinct issues and it should be possible to go give the nominator a lot more information about what they should do to improve their nomination. For example, they should get a message that says something like "This probably is eligible but you have provided insufficient information and evidence, you copied the description from the web, and furthermore the photo's not very good." Instead of "live animal" or whatever like we get now.
A checkbox kind of like the updated “What is it?” would be good.
Just make it so that only one needs to be “Yes” but multiple can be selected.
@PkmnTrainerJ-ING Something like this? Would also be possible to have one for Rejection Criteria.
Yeah that does the job. 👍
There is a serial coal nominator in a suburb near me whose nominations at a minimum could have 6 rejection reasons. They are all photos taken from within her car, they have a watermark from her phone, the photos are very blurry (if daytime) or almost totally dark other than a reflection of her face in the car window partially obscured by her cellphone with the flash lit up (if it is dark out), she puts her first name in the description, she mentions Pokémon catching in the description, and they are for stuff like various chain fast food restaurants, bus stop signs, K-12 schools, gas stations, or street signs. All of them have supporting information that they need more Pokéstops in the area and that she is a senior and has difficulty getting to stops further away.
She used to include her trainer code for Pokémon Go and say she will send gifts from the new Pokéstop if it was approved to anyone that adds her (that stopped after a few rounds of tagging as abuse but she still submits coal with the other rejection criteria on a regular basis).
I alternate rejection reasons each time one of her nominations show up but I would totally be up for checking all possible rejection reasons for her nominations. It would probably result in rejection emails that are way too long for Niantic's standard rejection template though. 🤣
Many nominators doesn't know what is valid or not, only when finding out about wayfarer and joining is when you realise the things you used to submit was kind of silly and I speak out of experience. Once you participate in wayfarer you learn what is accepted and what not. Niantic should somehow encourage the players to join wayfarer. Lure them in with exclusive rewards or getting paid with in-game currency. This will greatly improve the quality of nominations.
@Zulpha-PGO There's a longstanding suggestion that everyone should have to pass the Wayfarer test before they can submit, and Niantic has even said that's on the roadmap.
I have a non-existent portal that i try try try and try to remove and when it finally comest through, it's just back up again with the same photo maybe two weeks later. W... T... F.... It should be possible to change/remove oirtals by stating various discrapencies, community guidlines violations AND submitting photo of... let's say in that case EMPTY WALL. With FLAGGING this place! Another example - plaque of Street patron was hanging on a building. Building was levelled to bare Ground and plaque was moved to the "start" of the Street. Now we have 2 portals - one old and non existent, one New that does. I've been trying for 2 ff Years to get rid of the old one. now conundrum.... it's both a duplicate AND it doesn't exist, bo noone cares... ppl that review this - i know it's your precious gym in PG, but have some courage - I've had none and i still have none for last 6 Years. Grow some spine!