I would like to see the person who made the inappropriate review punished.

Dear Niantic.


This candidate is a religious institution of an emerging religion.

School (K-12) is not satisfied and seeks punishment for those who selected the relevant reason.


(原文)

この候補は新興宗教の宗教施設です。

学校(K-12)は納得がいかないので該当理由を選択した者への処罰を求めます。


sauce


Thanks for reading.

Comments

  • kawin240-INGkawin240-ING Posts: 803 Ambassador

    If you want the reviewers to be reported quickly, use help chat instead.

    Go to the wayfarer website. Click on the help tab. Wait until an orange bubble appears, then click on that. Type "skip", and then choose "Report wayfarer abuse", and finally, choose "Fake Nominations / Criteria Issues". Follow the instructions there, and tell them that you want to report reviewers for the reasons they used, and how they don't apply at all.

    レビュアーの報告を迅速に行いたい場合は、代わりにヘルプチャットを使用してください。

    ウェイファーラーのサイトへ ヘルプタブをクリックします。オレンジ色の泡が表示されるまで待ち、それをクリックします。skip」と入力し、「Report wayfarer abuse」を選択し、最後に「Fake Nominations / Criteria Issues」を選択します。そこにある指示に従って、レビュアーが使った理由や、まったく当てはまらないことを報告したい旨を伝えてください。

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,383 ✭✭✭✭✭

    K-12はともかくまずはタイトルと説明文を修正してノミネートすると良いでしょう。

    日本語の「、」や「。」、「!」はタイトルでは絵文字の扱いと同等に考える人もいるので、そのあたりは避けてタイトルをつけるのが適切でしょう。

    そして、私はそのあたりは気にしませんが、いわゆる新興宗教の類は日本では精神的アレルギーを感じる方々が多いです。

    そのため否認されるケースはありますが、その点は各自のイデオロギーに左右される傾向にあるのは知った上で説明文や補足情報を書くのが良いと思われます。


    K-12, but first, you may want to revise the title and description to nominate it.

    Japanese "," "。"and "!" are considered by some to be equivalent to the treatment of pictograms in the title, so it would be appropriate to avoid them in the title.

    And although I don't care about them, many people in Japan are mentally allergic to so-called new religions.

    Therefore, there are cases where they are rejected, but it is better to write explanations and supplementary information knowing that this point tends to be influenced by each person's ideology.

  • 82quuu-PGO82quuu-PGO Posts: 277 ✭✭✭

    I know how you feel painfully well.

    I sometimes see unreasonable reviewers.

    If you are near the facility, why not try again?

    This would also be fine as the title is the full name of the branch.

    Also write that the title is the full name of the branch.

    Maybe next time it will be approved.

    Let's think about countermeasures together when it doesn't work even after 3 nominations.

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 5,515 Ambassador
    edited February 2023

    Hello and Welcome @llmiconll-PGO

    It is is frustrating but there are few things to understand.

    The feedback reasons you are given are unhelpful. The algorithm looks for reasons. It could well be that 1 person clicked on K12 it could be a miss understanding or a simple misclick.

    The key part is that overall the majority of reviewers did not vote to accept. Take note of what wayfinders say are likely to be issues and rethink how you have presented your case and the evidence you provide.

    Do try to remember that reviewers are fellow wayfinders and we are all human. Mistakes will occasionally happen. No reviewer has a 100% agreement record. Doing the reviews is also subjective and there will be a range of results within the broad guidelines we have.

    If you need some impartial advice on a revised nomination we will be happy to make suggestions.

    Edited to remove exact number of reasons.

    Post edited by Elijustrying-ING on
  • kawin240-INGkawin240-ING Posts: 803 Ambassador

    Your saying a lot that wayfarer looks for 3 reasons. Can you explain how you get to that number? Just curious.

    Wayfarer only ever displays 2 reasons at once, but there is no limit or minimum rejection reason number. You can have 1 single rejection reason, or like me, 6 different ones. IIRC someone had a stuck upgrade and ended up with 12 reasons even

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 5,515 Ambassador

    @kawin240-ING I observed that I would see a max of 3. You only see 2 at anyone time but closing and restarting can bring up one of the first two and a third. Each time I have repeated this it’s been showing 2 out of a pool of 3. I have never seen more than 3. I’ve seen others also mention 3. I tried this on quite a few of different ages it was fairly consistent. I had 1 if if remember correctly that had one but I think it was clear why that one was coming up so an obvious reject.

    So you have had a pool of 6 reasons for the one wayspot. Gosh that’s a different experience. Thanks for adding it to the pool.

    That’s interesting. I wonder if it is meant to be 1 or max 2 as that is all it can display at any one time and the algorithm goes a bit wonky every now and then, like when there is a mix of rejection or duplicate. 🤔

    I’ll use some more circumspect wording.

    But sigh, why can’t we just be told what what it is trying to do - it causes more problems than it solves in current state.

  • kawin240-INGkawin240-ING Posts: 803 Ambassador

    Here is an example with 6 reasons as proof. The reasons were saved by a plugin, but it would be the same if I refreshed the website over and over again and noting the reasons down manually. You indeed only see 2 at a time.

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 5,515 Ambassador

    That shows how broken it is as a feedback tool.

  • NorbertG82-PGONorbertG82-PGO Posts: 100 ✭✭✭

    I see absolutely no reason for this obfuscation. Why do we have to reload the page several times? Why can't we just see all the reasons listed? And it would also be nice to see (at least) which reason was chosen by only 1 person (in which case we can often disregard it).

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 5,515 Ambassador

    Hello @NorbertG82-PGO

    This is Niantic, and nothing is straightforward. There is a lot to understand in wayfarer.

    I do think that although the goal is to try and help wayfinders think about what they submitted, it is so crude that it is just confusing.

    In a twisted way it drives people here (and to other groups) where actually the range of people means that you can get not only educated guesses at why it may not have been accepted but help to offer ways forward. This last part is important as it can be hard to see that for yourself.

    There are regular suggestions for improvements, maybe one day 🤔

  • 82quuu-PGO82quuu-PGO Posts: 277 ✭✭✭

    Apparently the title seems to be the official name of the religious facility.

    When I searched for address and religion, the same name was hit.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,383 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well, even if that were the case, you would still need to be creative in how you title it. 

    A certain percentage of reviewers probably consider it spam.


    まあ、仮にそうだとしてもタイトルの付け方は工夫が必要でしょう。(苦笑)

    おそらくスパムだと考えているレビュワーが一定割合います。

  • 82quuu-PGO82quuu-PGO Posts: 277 ✭✭✭

    Maybe I don't know if I'll approve it if it's my first review.

    That's why I think it's necessary to devise ways to compensate for the shortcomings with supplementary explanations, such as attaching links.

    Decent titles are not so easy to find.

  • kawin240-INGkawin240-ING Posts: 803 Ambassador

    For anyone curious: the nomination in question is an info sign of a castle in their staircase to their restrooms, with geotagged supporting image. Still, people are allergic to indoor nominations around my region, and trail markers of course too are a no-no here.


Sign In or Register to comment.