And now I am reviewing incorrectly



  • 29andCounting-PGO29andCounting-PGO Posts: 2,344 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It’s doesn’t take that long to say I’m sorry. Look I just did it.

  • 29andCounting-PGO29andCounting-PGO Posts: 2,344 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Look, I’m still sorry.

  • AisforAndis-INGAisforAndis-ING Posts: 1,060 Ambassador

    Do you find it reasonable that Niantic has always sent out threatening emails?

    I don't think the emails are "threatening", at least not in an unfair way. Niantic stating "Note that any further violations can lead to the suspension of your Wayfarer and Pokémon GO accounts" is a simple statement of fact, even if that might make you feel threatened. If you violate the rules of any online service, you are putting your account at risk. Would you perceive this to be an unfair "threat" if Niantic said this about spoofers? How would you prefer them to word it? On the other side of the coin, what would you want someone to read if they were repeatedly found to be incorrectly rejecting your acceptable/eligible nominations (which is what this text was supposed to be used for)?

    The issue isn't that line of text itself, it's about the surrounding scenario. The fact that the email didn't attempt to educate the reviewer on what they had done wrong, but more so the fact that Cyndie and a small handful of others reviewed fairly and still got this message. It honestly seems like some of you are moving the goal post. I frankly think some of you would have been satisfied had you not latched onto the potential for a clarification email.

    Do you think it appropriate for nobody in the entire company to write a few reply posts here to say 'Whoops! These errors really spiraled out of control.

    While I clearly do think and have already said that I hope they do this, I think many of you are looking past the bigger picture here. Who all should get that clarification/redaction? Just the people who logged onto the forum and complained? Would reach everyone who was effected? Should Niantic investigate other tickets to see if more people were wrongly effected, or just apologize to the three people who spoke up and call it a day? Wouldnt that be disingenous if they did that? If you want a deeper investigation that might lead to a more permanent resolution and improvement for the platform, that takes time that many of you clearly don't want to give them. If this was an isolated incident, why should an issue that effected three people be given priority, when there are issues with the new review flow that effect everyone? Has an issue truly "spiraled out of control" if we have so few people identified as effected? Don't you think more people would have come forward by now?

    This is an unfortunate, but small scale issue. I would love for every person wronged by the Wayfarer team to get an apology, but do you *really* want them spending their time apologizing to every user who has ever been involved in a mishap? Think about all the people who had an appeal wrongly rejected, or an upgrade robbed from them by something that went into Niantic Voting. They have to prioritize.

  • AisforAndis-INGAisforAndis-ING Posts: 1,060 Ambassador

    Let's go all the way back to where they told me I reviewed incorrectly by rejecting a logo for a chain restaurant. The same kind of thing they have trained the ai to reject.

    And like many things, the AI clearly doesn't work perfectly if it didn't identify and reject the one that you ended up reviewing. Mistakes happen. And what happened to you after was also a mistake. It's unfortunate, but sometimes we have to move on one way or another.

    I deserve an apology.

    You certainly do. But you're acting like you're entitled to one as a result of my earlier comment, and that isn't the case.

    This is not the first time this has happened. The first time I did eventually let it slide, considered it a one-off, and went back to reviewing. Now I am not sure.

    If the first time you got this message you weren't dissuaded from reviewing, why are you this time? It was empty then and it's empty now. If anything, this should be more evidence of that.

    How do we know it was just a handful?

    Considering we had two additional people come forward on the same day this happened to you, and zero in the following two weeks that this thread has stayed at the front of the forum due to constant discussion, I would expect that someone else would have come forward by now if it was a more widespread issue.

    Have all reviewers who used to review central North Carolina been issued a warning email and stopped reviewing?

    It's disingenuous to ignore the fact that votes on existing nominations were wiped, and that issue (combined with terrible rural prioritization logic) is far more likely to be the reason that less nominations in your area have resolved. Again, this is an example of a much bigger problem that I would really hope Niantic prioritizes over some apology emails. However, if you'd like reach out to your local submitters and reviewers and get them to provide evidence of any more wrongly issued emails, perhaps we can use that to also get them the apology that they would also deserve, as well as add evidence to getting this ordeal more attention.

    I never expected to get that email you promised me

    I never promised you anything, I simply acted as an ambassador should and relayed what Niantic told us. I think myself and just about every other Ambassadors were skeptical, but who am I to decide that that detail should be left out when I am conveying a message? I'm here to be an Ambassador for the community, not to be Niantic's public relations specialist. While I could have left that detail out and made Niantic look better, I think it's better to be honest and transparent with you all when and where I can be. Would you rather ambassadors hide these types of things?

    If I have to choose between reviewing and being able to submit nominations and keep my Pokemon Go account, then I will give up reviewing every time. As I have.

    No one is forcing you to choose. There's always a possibility that you could get an incorrect punishment for submitting as well. And just like if you were ever incorrectly issued an actual punishment for reviewing or submitting, I can gaurentee you the ambassadors would fight tooth and nail to get it overturned. But from what I have seen, the abuse ladder and appeals process has proven to be very fair, and it would be extremely unlikely to get to that point anyways. Rumors and stories of false bans are deeply, deeply exaggerated. You don't have anything legitimate to worry about.

  • rufoushumming-PGOrufoushumming-PGO Posts: 1,373 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well in theory it is a generic franchise chain right :-) They are in 5 countries. But yeah a place to exercise.

    Personally I think the nomination is not great. But it should not have failed for Generic Business.

    Hear me out. Title is like just saying McDonalds. I would probs say more. The main photo does not **** anything and looks like a drive by photo. Supporting info starts well. Place to Exercise. Then no supporting information. Not even a link to the website of the gym. It shouts no effort. Which is unfair on the nomination as it should pass.

    IF you go again on this. Work the nomination. If you have no outside photos. Just walk into entrance and nail sign on wall or something. I get it the building is huge and the sign high. I have had gyms pass and I have done the extra work as suggested above and they all passed

    You are right though - it should not have got rejected for generic.

    Good luck

  • Eneeoh-PGOEneeoh-PGO Posts: 674 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Except reviewing nominations does not violate the conditions of use of Wayfarer, and certainly doesn't violate ToS for Pokemon Go. @cyndiepooh-ING was simply doing her level-headed best to help the community by engaging with Niantic's system in the manner intended.

    Somewhere along the way, @AisforAndis-ING , you seem to have become entirely estranged from the community you are supposed to represent. You might want to contemplate when, where, and why this has happened, then reconsider if you actually wish to act as our ambassador.

    You are correct that each Wayfarer wishes for their submissions to be judged fairly maybe even with a bit of charity. We want our fellow nominators to nominate less coal and more great content. We wish for reviewers to be all on one wavelength. Still, the people supposedly running this show seem notoriously awful at messaging, maintaining unity, or communicating much if at all.

    They are going to have to step up their game. Perhaps you should, too.

    Or else just go home.

  • TampaAlligator-PGOTampaAlligator-PGO Posts: 54 ✭✭
    edited November 2023
  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 5,327 Ambassador

    @cyndiepooh-ING thanks for letting us all know that you have received an email.

    Take some time to absorb.

    I would have hoped more could have been posted here to clarify the aspect of what you were meant to learned from the email.

    @NianticTintino-ING could some learning about reviewing similar situations be posted so that there is some reassuranc as to what people should do?

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 5,327 Ambassador

    @cyndiepooh-ING I would suggest to take it slow, and view skips or breaks as positives. You are a good reviewer, keep reminding yourself of that.

  • cyndiepooh-INGcyndiepooh-ING Posts: 1,244 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thank you so much for all the positive feedback! When I look back here, only one person was actually not supportive, but that one was enough. I am done with Wayfarer for the foreseeable future. I hope some positive result for others comes from this discussion.

  • Purptacular-PGOPurptacular-PGO Posts: 284 ✭✭✭✭

    So we should assume going forward that Niantic wants us to vote to approve all restaurant logos? Since @cyndiepooh-ING's email told her that her original rejection was incorrect and the follow-up clearly did not reverse that position?

Sign In or Register to comment.