Upgrades are pure trash.

HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,408 ✭✭✭✭✭

What we know about upgrades:

  • According to Q12 in the December AMA: "...upgrades are not viewed as a tradeoff between accuracy and speed of resolution. Upgrades reflect how aligned your decisions are with the community only."
  • Future development in progress: More improvements to the Nominations Management page, including the... ability to better manage your Upgrades.

Upgrades once had their place in our city, they quickly expedited nominations in the city from a half-year turnaround to just a day or two. If someone wanted a nomination go to through, they would upgrade it. But they work as a double-edged sword, you had to ensure that it was perfect and unambiguous enough that it would not be interpreted differently among non-locals and people who at least knew the criteria.

But this is all further from the truth know. Now they are a blight. They have been for a long time now, and it is unfortunate. A series of metal plate trail markers in a nature reserve in the ACT were all approved except for the only one which happened to be upgraded, that apparently had "other rejection criteria". Furthermore, an upgraded church entitled "The Loft" in the CBD was also rejected for "other rejection criteria" which is a lead on people lacking comprehension skills. But the biggest kicker was a large sign in a lookout.

This nomination was rejected for Unsafe access.

It is a beautiful view from the summit of Mt Ainslie which was rejected for this ludicrous reason. The supporting photo shows a whole group of people looking out and standing at this area and out towards the city. There is even a woman standing right in front of the object reading it and out into the view.

And it apparently constitutes unsafe access? The lunacy of reviewers that upgrades attract, really.

Upgrades will often highly increase the rate of rejection for the majority of my nominations. It will either be the most stupidest reason like the one above, or it will be straight up "other rejection criteria", before being simply just "Inappropriate activities" all the time. I know there's some people who claim that they have a 100 per cent approval rate even with upgrades, or even certain people will have to upgrade their nominations to avoid their own strict local queues.

There are good people and submitters out there in the rest of Australia who use their upgrades well. The nice artworks and nominations from Bunbury WA, the nominations from Sarina QLD, the wayspots that fill up the town in Nhulunbuy NT, and the occasional upgraded nomination from Melbourne VIC are great. Then you have some of the endless Newman WA mine camp nominations that are clearly upgraded, to varying degrees of quality.

But there are some certain submitters (such as those submitting jax tyres in Browns Plains QLD for "d8sabled players" and a water corp cathodic protection in Caversham WA) who should have their reviewing privileges revoked. Yes, when you see a coal nomination from halfway across the country, there is a highly likely chance that they're also reviewing. It's also a highly likely chance that they are also reviewing your upgraded nomination also. So for both ways it is always a highly increased risk with upgrades.

Below are a whole bunch of posts which cite the displeasure of getting upgrades or those that request not having automatic upgrades (which I've copied from a previous comment:

Upgrades are a curse/trash or should have more manual control as discussed (with various... mileage) hereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehere, and here. In fact, 94% of wayfinders believe they should have the decision rest on them as to when to use an upgrade. If there was a way I could get rid of upgrades (or at least have better manual control over them), even at my own expense, I'd trade them all away.

Here are five other more recent posts about the negative sentiment about upgrades after the quote above:

Automatic Upgrades, "Upgrades", Upgrade = Rejection, Upgrade-curse, Upgrade is totally useless!

...

tl;dr:

  • When will we be able to "better manage our upgrades"? Such as opting to turn off the automatic upgrade system? Is there a timeframe or release for this?
  • It might seem common because when people's upgraded nominations get rejected, they become the highly vocal minority. Like myself with this post for example.
  • In my experience, upgrades will highly increase the chance of rejection. I myself have had to deal with this endlessly and particularly curate what might get upgraded, but for those that do I have resubmitted immediately after rejection with a quick tweak and they are all approved without upgrades.
  • The experience and track record with upgrades is not universal. But if people want to accrue and use their upgrades, let them. For others, please give us the ability to turn them off soon.

Comments

  • Kawhinot-INGKawhinot-ING Posts: 157 ✭✭✭

    I also use upgrades only on something that is nearly a perfect nomination, but has been in queue for a while. Even so, I still have had very legitimate playgrounds, baseball diamonds, community centers, footbridges, murals, etc., strangely rejected for weird reasons, only then to renominate them again but with no upgrade, and then have them get approved.


    I'm almost wondering if there is a different review process occuring on a upgrade after it goes into voting, as it seems that the review process is much more restrictive (i.e. does an upgrade require more favorable reviews compared to a non-upgraded nomination).

  • PlutoIsSad-PGOPlutoIsSad-PGO Posts: 188 ✭✭✭

    Upgrades bring reviews from a wider area. I think some don't care about areas other than their own and vote upgrades from outside down just because. They know there are no repurcussions.

    Kind of like teens who purposely walk slowly across a street because they know drivers can't do anything.

    The lookout is perfect wayspot. I'm surprised that it isn't one already.

  • tehstone-INGtehstone-ING Posts: 874 Ambassador
    edited February 5

    which year is that? and without a number, the percentage isn't much use. your one anecdata about every upgrade (in another country no less) being approved isn't much compared to the stack on the other side. kinda seems like a "doesn't effect me so I don't believe it's real" situation.

    Post edited by tehstone-ING on
  • Shilfiell-INGShilfiell-ING Posts: 1,051 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The reverse is also true here - in my area, using an upgrade is the best was to get a nomination voted on quickly and accurately. That is NOT the case everywhere. I live in an area where I review in a foreign country frequently, but that country shares my language in most candidates, and the two countries are on friendly terms. If I get a review from a distance away, I try to judge it fairly and accurately. So, in the analogy above, "this is undeniable proof that poverty and homelessness are not prevalent in my immediate circle and field of view", and no more. I know that upgrades routinely lead to rejection in some areas, but that does not mean they're universally "trash".

  • phi2458-PGOphi2458-PGO Posts: 164 ✭✭✭

    I have the same experience. Upgraded nominations have a higher rejection rate in my area. And many of them are rejected for weird reasons, just like the OP’s examples. Rumor has it that someone in another area uses a bot to review. If you upgrade your nominations, your nominations have a higher chance of being reviewed by the bot. That is just a rumor. No one knows for sure.

    Anyway, I think there is some problem with the current upgrade mechanic. Instead of a faster processing rate, I want more serious reviewers who read through all descriptions to review my nominations. I don’t care about waiting for a few weeks to get the results. (In my area, nominations must wait for more than one year to be processed without upgrading.) Just don’t let stupid reviewers review my upgraded nominations. Earning an upgrade does not take a little effort. It is frustrating to see upgraded nominations being rejected for ridiculous reasons.

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 2,287 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @tehstone-ING Sorry, 3 a.m. typo. The correct date is May 2020, not 2022.

    @DadWorksAtNia-ING I didn't say or imply that my experience was universal. I merely said that "everything that's upgraded is rejected" is not a universal experience.

  • sogNinjaman-INGsogNinjaman-ING Posts: 3,273 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My empirical observation is "63% of all upgraded submissions are accepted", based on a sample size of 1.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 432 ✭✭✭

    Upgrade are a plague:

    -They are useless for me because a normal contribution get a decision within two weeks maximum. (and frequently in less than a week).

    -They reduces chances for a nomination to be validated.


    It would be great if Niantic change the upgrade system and let us use them for other thing than just get a decision faster...

  • Roli112-PGORoli112-PGO Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The OP said themselves it is not Universal. I don't feel your contribution added anything beneficial to the discussion. OP made a suggestion for those who are being plagued with rejections to have the ability to turn upgrades off if they want to.

  • MelodyS88Chi-PGOMelodyS88Chi-PGO Posts: 627 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 5

    Same here. 100% of my 14 nominations since November 2021 were upgraded, all were accepted.

  • dustinyeeaah-PGOdustinyeeaah-PGO Posts: 438 ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 6

    I really hope we get the option to save our upgrades in the next months. I live in a very fast cell and everything gets accepted/rejeceted within one week - one month. It feels like a waste to earn upgrades, when I can just wait for two weeks and I get the mail without doing extra work. I would like to save Upgrades and use them when I'll move to another city/another cell. I have 5.3k reviews so I review kinda regularly, but every time I get close to 100% there's this habit of stopping reviewing. Also I feel like (personal experience) that nominations with Upgrades are more likely to get rejected!

  • TooLegitToExist-INGTooLegitToExist-ING Posts: 35 ✭✭

    Sitting on 6 upgrades ununused atm & would prefer not it auto assigned to next one i submits.....

  • ScaryS0ul-PGOScaryS0ul-PGO Posts: 129 ✭✭✭

    Unfortunately, my area too have high percentage of reject when being upgraded

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 843 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 7

    I' m aware that the current upgrade is speeding up the review process by letting reviewers other than those around the nominated location review it. But this is problematic on both sides.


    (1) Low quality reviewers in other districts will also participate in the review, as in the example given here.

    (2) Abusive communities that want to approve ineligible and low-quality POIs will conduct reviews in their neighborhoods only, without using upgrades.


    Therefore, some improvements need to be made. Perhaps wayfinder will come up with a better idea in the future when they become ambassadors, but personally I think this is the way to go.


    (1) Expand the review area with and without upgrades. (Make it impossible for collusion to occur)

    (2) If there is an upgrade, the review will be given priority to great reviewers. Also, the number of reviews required for a review result should be reduced by a certain percentage.

    (3) In case of no upgrade, the number of reviews required for the result will increase. (The review result will be delayed.)

    (4) In both cases, if a specific reason for denial is given, the review will go through a different route. (Prevention of abuse and false nominations)


    Faster results from upgrades, while discouraging abuse as much as possible.

    The system should be rebuilt with both of these aspects in mind.

    The emergence of low-quality POIs, especially through collusion, has become more pronounced in the past few years, leading Wayfarer to bankruptcy. And this pile of garbage is growing rapidly.

  • ZinkyZonk-INGZinkyZonk-ING Posts: 273 ✭✭✭✭

    Lol upgrading is the curse of **** .... If you want a poi don't upgrade it lolololol

    I typically choose a gazebo or traffic box art. They have better luck.

  • noszelias-PGOnoszelias-PGO Posts: 8 ✭✭

    In my personal experience, I have 2 options when submitting a new POI:


    1) upgrade it and pray you don't get bad reviewers;

    2) never get an answer.


    I had to use upgrades on 2 years old nominations because I felt bad seeing them sitting there for so long, and having to do between 140 and 300 reviews for every single POI (because sometimes you need to nominate a possible POI 2 or 3 times) gets really tiring.

    I'm not asking for nomination to be accepted in 2 weeks even without upgrades, but please don't make me wait 4 years for a park to get accepted (it entered the voting stage a year and a half ago, I'm not going to upgrade it only so I can see how much longer it'll take)

Sign In or Register to comment.