The Appeal Queue is nearly over
Blania6967-PGO
Posts: 144 ✭✭✭
The appeal queue considerably reduced over the past month.
Appeal from 21/12 resolved on the 15/08
Appeal from 24/01 resolved on the 22/08
Appeal from 11/04 resolved on the 08/09
Appeal from 06/05 resolved on the 14/09
If appeals continue to be resolved at this pace, the queue should be empty before the end of October !
Tagged:
Comments
We are glad that you have noticed the results of the hard work we have put in to reduce the backlog in Nominations appeal😃
👏 my last appeal went through yesterday, it had been in appeals since April this year. I was slightly annoyed that another appeal I sent in after that one got decided 2 days after I sent in the appeal whereas that one just sat there, but finally!
We had been reviewing appeals on both FIFO and LIFO basis earlier but that did not work well. Your appeal might have been picked for LIFO reviews.
Submitted 21st April
Rejected 2nd May
Appealed 5th May
Accepted 14th September
Thanks for the extra effort.
Clear the Edit queues next please!
My appeal made April 27, 2023 was resolved September 13, 2023 (almost 5 months).
Some great positive news. Well done.
Is there any system in place to grant Upgrade reimbursements to people whose Upgrades were lost on nominations which were successful under appeal?
Sadly many of the things didn't really get a proper re-review.
I just might as well resubmit I these things. On the other hand, I think times did move forward and this isn't as relevant as it was 4 years ago.
I had 4 in que, now 3. So the waiting period is moving towards 3+ months and no more 4+ months.
Good thing that the queues are almost gone.
Sad thing that there are still a lot of completely eligible nominations rejected by Niantic officials with vague copy-paste comments.
So new update from my Appeal Que.
2 in Que.
1 in-voting
window opens within a few hours.
Thus waiting period is now just just less than 3 months.
Can you illustrate these claims of rejected Appeals? @NianticAaron
I don't consider a 3-4 month wait to mean the "queues are almost gone".
I have a couple.
One was rejected as being taken from a car, though if anyone had looked at a satellite map I'd love to know how you got there. Got accepted on resubmit.
Another: "Thanks for the appeal, Explorer! We could verify the object in question no longer exist. Hence, we are unable to reverse the decision. We recommend you review the Wayspot Criteria before submitting your next Wayspot contribution: https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/21-wayfarer" Which is rubbish as I walked past it after this, and its still there. I can only assume the reviewer looked in streetview and didn't notice streetview is 15 years stale for that location.
A suggestion to avoid the appeal queue from getting out of hand would be to allow a single resubmit before going to appeal. Most good nominations would get through on second nomination.
The queue went from more than a year to 2 months now (an appeal from the 12 of August went threw today) in 3 months.
Still seems to me that the queue is nearly over, the waiting time goes down (even if it slowed down a bit)
They had such huge queue because for the first weeks they allowed one appeal per day instead of one per month as stated. Many people abused that situation and when Niantic finally adjusted its system to enforce the one per month limit they allowed all those extra appeals to remain instead of clearing all those pending appeals that were sent against the rules.
Wed, Aug 30 at 6:10 AM - Twin Footbridge
Sat, Sep 30 at 5:52 AM - Finforum
2 months. Appeal process. If you include the In-Que and In-Voting process. It becomes a arbitrary stick to beat Niantic
Hey,
First of its nice to see the backlog being smaller.
Sadly as I have mentioned in https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/47785/unjustified-rejections-of-points-of-interest-poi-a-closer-look there is a lot of work to be done stil.
I have found 3 recent Appeal that should been approved in the first place.
The first is a historical power tower and not in use anymore. Even if it was ' just ' a tower there is a option for that in the system.
Second is a footbridge and helpful to get over in autumn when the weather makes the area less welcoming.
Third is a historical bunker near the local hospital and not on private property.
As you might noticed also some of the reasons for rejection in the first place is rubbish.
Thanks for your time and looking forward to seeing your response.
Even if it was ' just ' a tower there is a option for that in the system.
The list of categories is NOT a list of eligible nominations. You can find that schools are listed there and as you should know k12 schools are totally forbidden.
You're ignoring the "Other Rejection Criteria" in your three nominations, but based just on those photos I can easily understand why someone would pick them, you must do the effort to show that your nomination is really a valid PoI. You have all the info when you're there, but the reviewers will see only a tiny photo and your description, guess what happens when you don't add good descriptions and supporting info.
Hahahahahahahahahahahah thats because everyone has given up on wayfarer and dosent care to appeal anymore
Kind of think it is the contrary, around me even the players that aren't active on wayfarer anymore still login once in a will to use their appeals. Where I live they are the only solution to get restaurants or fitness centers threw for example
Just had another appeal rejected ..
"Thanks for the appeal, Explorer! The object's location in question does not have pedestrian access which does not meet the Wayfarer criteria. We recommend you review the Wayspot Criteria before submitting your next Wayspot contribution: https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/21-wayfarer/faq/2774-rejection-criteria/"
This was for a refuge on the pilgrims way crossing the sands.
If it had been turned down for a valid reason I'd be happy, but no pedestrian access on a national pilgrimage trail that has been in use since 635 AD, and used by thousands of people each year seems a little wrong. Even google maps has the path on it ...
Is there permanent access or is it tidal? If it can only be reached on certain tides then the rejection would be correct by Niantic's rules. If it's not tidal then it sounds like a bad review.
Its tidal, like the roads and most of the surrounding area. I thought the criteria was safe pedestrian access, not 24/7 ?. Everything is signed by the council as they get fed up of rescuing drivers.
I've been to Bamburgh Castle, Seahouses and Holy Island before on a school trip. Lovely area!
I know people get caught out by the tides fairly regularly up there as you said, even despite the obvious signs that give you all the safety info you would need. Whilst the refuge is obviously there to provide safety when the tide comes in, you can't really access it on foot when the tide is in unless you're already in the refuge. So it doesn't have safe pedestrian access all of the time for Niantic purposes, and that's likely why they rejected it.
"you can't really access it on foot when the tide is in unless you're already" doesn't that apply to the whole island...It's the same as crossing a road, its not safe to do when a car is coming. But I get your point.
Not aware of any pedestrians ever needing rescuing, but plenty of drivers get caught out. Not so much now they've closed the lower car park (on mainland side)
1st is it a farm, has the evidence been clearly illustrated?
2nd is it a bridge or gaps in the wood, again is evidence of a trail linking to this bridge?
3rd recent discussions on Bunkers talks about the lack of special importance. This one has plant life obstructing the view, pedestrian access is another possible decline.
nice sticks in a area close to the water table. Where is the Torii or signs or something more special?
The nomination was for the refuge (mostly used as viewing platform, or to sit down and have lunch), the sticks just mark the safe path over the sands. Trail markers are at each end and also subject to tide, like the road alternative. If the refuge isn't acceptable that's fine, but my objection is the safe public access reason, safe times to cross are published at each end, and online.
The route is very popular as the alternative is 3 miles on a busy narrow road with no pavement (also subject to tide times).
POI with only tidal access don't meet the safe pedestrian access criteria (I can't find the comment clarification, but it was confirmed somewhere!) - shipwrecks, lighthouses that only have tidal access are likely to be removed if reported.