Should the number of nominations be reduced by nominators
rufoushumming-PGO
Posts: 1,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
Just asking. Could we improve the system by reducing numbers of nominations
by day
by week
by month
One of many options. I just want to put it out there....
And for those who get warnings for abuse to get their numbers of nominations reduced?
Shorter queues for review?
Faster turn around times?
Less pap in system?
And or all the other benefits.
Of course if you are in the game to nominate as much as possible - to be the mostest. Of course this presents problems. BUT in PGO you can only submit X number or Routes. Why not apply the same rule to nominating POIS???
It is just a question. Don't hate me. you don't know me. Until you do know me. in which case might be valid ;-)
My money is on more disagrees than anything else..... Just saying
Comments
I like your ideas and how you explain them. It's an interesting thought in theory. In practice, as always, it's more complicated. I would be worried about honest nominators who get troll/bot/abusive rejections. For example, the influential number of German reviewers rejecting trail markers as "license plate." German submitters of trail markers shouldn't be punished by having their number of nominations reduced.
So you are saying change the system back the way it was a couple years ago? I would be even more upset than I already am about recent reset. It is great for when you discover a new area built. Makes it really hard to put a new place on the map when you can only nominate 7 things in a two week period(think that is what it was. Ex. we had a new very large park built in my city and I have been able to add 38 poi to it in a very short time period and only half the park has been built. Our community will be holding community day there Sunday and hopefully it is endorsed by Wayfarer like the last one. We received a bonus pokestop, prizes, etc that would not have been possible if I was not able to have them many noms. Park would have been terrible with no spawns(next map should add tons of spawn points) or stops to add lures too. SO I like having 40 even though I need more than that still haha. They change it back they would lose so many players.
I would like to keep the 40 submission limit, but I would like for them to regrow more slowly, like maybe at the rate of 3-4 per week. This would allow people to save their submissions up for things like traveling to an underpopulated area, but it would reduce the ability of people to flood the system with coal simply because they can.
I'm both a yes and a no. Yes because there are many people (particularly someone in Turramurra) who do not deserve to spam all their 40 nominations and the daily accrual everyday. But no because it severely limits the amount of nominations that I'm able to contribute while I'm exploring. I'm always running out of nominations.
Before Pokemon GO had submissions, I struggled with only having 13 nominations every 14 days. At that point I often asked people if they could submit something for me, so I'd bring them to the place to nominate things. When Pogo nominations came out, it was only 7, but there were many more people who were available, so we made the most out of fulfilling our area, eventually becoming a bit of a friends group dedicated to the expansion of the network.
I'm on the cusp of hitting 2,500 approvals myself after many fortnights and 5-week periods of putting out my nominations for review for the last couple of years. I would say to scale it up by experience/contributions as one grows. The more you contribute, the more nominations/slots you should get, but the more scrutiny you should face. The bigger they are, the harder they fall.
I've generally tried over and over again to clamour for a Wayfarer level system. Why should someone who just reached Level 37 in Pokemon be given the same privileges as someone who's been reviewing for years, participated in many challenges, and even be the same level as an ambassador? They don't get special privileges, only word goop from the team.
The system a few years ago was terrible with 7 max. I like the current system. I've spent a single day using almost all 40 nominations. That was fantastic. It really allowed me to explore and add several new waypoints on a single day trip at a park. I have another park with my eyes on it as most of the trails have no POIs. When I had all those nominations, it encouraged me to review and earn upgrades. So not only did it help me push my nominations through, it helped me push other people's nominations through. The max of 7 was really painful as you were always hitting it. You might explore, hit the cap and have 4 other things you wanted to nominate but couldn't.
I learnt something. There used to be a limit . I agree 7 is not much. I mean woa...
40 every day until you reach 400. Would that be reasonable?
I am just bouncing the idea around.
I guess I am wondering if there is an appropriate mechanism to help reduce the queue. So many people say they have stuff in queue for ever. But with more nominators than reviewers that will forever be the case unless you can pull back the number of nominations
It explain why Niantic wants AI. So once the AI is really good will you need to worry about.
And would a nominator limit would be good for people on warnings. and if you come back from a ban.
Thank you everyone for your thoughts.
Just wondering due to the nature of this post. Are you currently impacted with long-ish queues in Sydney?
Not at all. Normal queue rate. I don't nominate a great deal. And I suspect after the latest update there is a backlog.
No I just see people talking about being in queue for ever. And I was just think what can be done to improve that.
Supply and demand says - If too much of one - adjust for the other. However Niantic has more nominators than reviewers. So even with the super reviewers - the only supply option is to reduce the numbers coming in. But that does not speed up review rate. And you still get grumpy super nominators who want 40 noms a day or 1,200 a month. But you get happier nominators who don't see longer queues.
But how I wonder how many people actually need 1,200 a month. Would 40 a day be OK but limited to 400 every 30 days. Would it spread nomination options around to more people. Would it allow better nominations be made as people stop to consider more. With more being around would it mean new or other nominators don't struggle to find quality. Does it stop the race to be the mostest nominator. Or the one who wants to nominate the most pap. Or the nominator bots.
Is the greater good being the majority being able to make more quality nominations seems a reasonable assumption to make. But what is the cost and to whom?
Remember I am not seeking an answer. I am pondering the permutations. As any decision will have an impact. So it is the one with the least impacts that interests.
It also shouts out WHY they are so focused on getting the AI right. And the AI is making a difference. Slowly. And is clearly learning. It is AI so needs to.
Of course teaching people to nominate well. To be educated in their choices can reduce the number of nominations. As would pushing the ability for level 37 PGO to make nominations back to 40.
But it could be - as a business - for profit - the more PGO options the better for the business. I am not across the business models/goals so can only guess at this one. But let us say that was a decision point. And legitimate - it was done - it appears - without considering the impact of more nominators in the system - how to onboard - review states etc etc. However we will never know.
So @HaramDingo-ING - just over thinking a problem I cannot solve :-)
@rufoushumming-PGO I thought it was a maximum of 40, and each one you used refreshed 30 days after you used it. Thus, 40 in 30 days.
I happen to think that's too much and it would be better to earn 2-3 per week with a maximum accrual of 40.
oh... I miss understood. Sorry.
So rolling total of 40 in every 30 days. You can use all in one day or spread over the 30 days
And it is always rolling. So you can never do more than 40 in a 30 day slot
Thank you @Hosette-ING
Be really cool to undertand the data split
% of people nominating X per month
% of type of nomination per month
I am intrigued - is there a super set of nominator and is there a propensity for that super set to nominate particular types of nominations.
Sorry, you are both incorrect. For PoGo, you get a flat 40 to start with. The cap is 40 meaning you never have more than 40 available. They accrue at the rate of 1 per day.
Hypothetical example: You have 40 nominations available. You explore an area and use all 40 nominations in a single day. Now you have zero nominations available. The next day, you would get 1 nomination back. And another the day after. Repeat for 30 days. If you don't make any new nominations, you would have 30 noms available after 30 days pass. You can use them at any time.
If you are an Ingress player, you can make additional nominations through that game. The higher your level, the more you get. I don't know the details as I don't play but I recall it's generous. That player base is likely much, much smaller.
So with that said, I've made 250-300 nominations so far. My approved rate is over 90%. I've also reviewed over 10,000 with an agreement rate around 80%.
As far as I'm aware, Ingress functions the same was as Pokémon Go when it comes to nomination limits and how they replenish.
Perhaps PoGo was refined to be in line with Ingress when it was capped at 7 nominations. I remember there were some high level local Ingress players who could do more noms than the players in PoGo at the time but that was pre-pandemic and pre-40 cap.
There was a time when Ingress players had 14 submission slots and Pogo players only had 7.
I get that. Makes sense. Thank you
Oh, and don't forget the time when the slots actually didn't accrue 1 per day at 0000, they actually came back exactly 13 days after it was submitted in Ingress by the minute (14 days in Pogo). It was a sad time.
Hi guys
firstly @HaramDingo-ING 2500 accepted nominations!!! You are a legend!!!!
@rufoushumming-PGO i stood back from nominations and reviewing last year after many years frustration. Was very passionate. For example in 2019 May through September went to every council park in a 5 km radius that was 200 parks took thousands of photos of park equipment, gazebos, artworks, info signs.
Yet I am inflexible when it comes to reviewers making the wrong call on my nominations. Brittle. My time is worth more to me than having people reject a playground for not being there when I have supervised my kid playing on it.
Was excited to see the new review flow but i don't want to re-engage at this stage in wayfarer as I have heavy personal commitments and I feel I have contributed considerably in the past.
But back to your main point no I do not believe in restrictions on nominations for proven nominators. There are times when I could drop 30-50-more nominations daily and all would be great wayspots.
~~Suddenly it gets all sparkly and dreamy. As though a magic wand of if only was waved~~
To be honest I really just want the option to contribute outside of wayfarer on my terms because I am time poor yet so wanting to contribute. Specifically for me in my situation. What I would like is to go to new places open an app tick off any nominations by others in that location clearing the queue, take pictures of the standard POIs not already in wayfarer go home when kids are in bed do data clean fix typos confirm spelling and upload one data file after I get peers to review the data set ... Then just upload. Bang into poi database no community consideration.
This would work in my area because of the strong community of map data nerds we have. I also have a very keen eyed opposition who would just jump at the chance to ridicule any poor work - and I ain't going to let that happen.
~~crashing back into reality... Niantic thinks it would need to pay me. Will take CMU in ingress? And coins in Pikmin .... Lol