It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
I think Niantic wants us to approve everything that's not firmly in the Rejection criteria, like schools or PRPs or in the middle of a trauma wing's ambulance bay. Approve everything else, but don't talk about it with others because that's abusive "voting ring" behavior. Unless, of course, it's a picnic area or scenic overlook without a sign, because Appeals reviewers are absurdly attached to signs.
Even with my severely restricted reviewing pace these days, I can't vote like that. I'll probably get another email as a result. Fortunately, my local area is populated with a fair amount of extremely easy-to-please, quantity-over-quality reviewers, so many of my rejections will never hit the Appeals stage...they'll just be lost agreements.
Niantic do seem to have a problem with the basic customer service principle of saying "we're sorry, we got it wrong". The staff are human and mistakes will happen - acknowledging that and owning mistakes is normally seen as a fundamental part of building trust with clients/customers. I'm not singling out individual staff members it feels that the company policy is not customer focused. Even companies with large customer bases can rapidly start losing them when they don't get the basics right.
None of the contributors to this thread are “mass rejecters” and equally they don’t just accept everything either. Both extremes are incorrect.
Everyone that both nominates and reviews will reject nominations and will have their own nominations rejected. So everyone knows what it feels like. It isn’t different groups of people it’s the same wayfinders.
Those people will be happy to help put that experience to work in order for you to help create wayspots in your community. If you give them a chance.
@TenFortyOne-PGO just curious, why have you “have, unfortunately, had to reject loads of waypoints near my area, including some of which that I absolutely wish I did not have to”?
So like everyone else here, you are correctly rejecting ineligible nominations. As @Elijustrying-ING said, everyone here is just trying to do their best to discern what is and what isn’t a good wayspot. This forum is the opportunity for people to discuss the gray areas and learn from each other’s experiences.
Repeatedly lashing out at others, name calling, and making exaggerated or misleading statements is unnecessarily creating a negative environment. It also can’t be good for you. Maybe step back a minute and take a deep breath.
I started to pull some of your quotes, but then realized that’s just silly. I dont want to argue, but encourage you to take a step back for a minute.
You had a difficult and frustrating experience, and we all get that. It’s time to remember though, these are just games and not worth the mental anguish your posts over the past few days have expressed.
There is a lot that is frustrating about wayfarer, and when the negative overshadows the positive, then maybe it’s not worth the effort. Niantic is a private company and can/will do what it wants. We can all try to make changes, but we low expectations in that area, given the company’s global reach….they’ve got a lot more to consider than just posts here.
That’s all. Just take care of yourself.
Have you read and absorbed the guidelines of this forum?
In particular the bullet point to treat each other with respect.
A lot of the discussions in this forum are around differences in judgement calls and cultural nuances since this is a global forum. It is perfectly possible to discuss differences in opinion and raise concerns whilst being respectful. Please stop to consider before you post. It is not just the words but the overall tone.
I have found that the following act as good reminders - is it necessary, is it truthful, is it kind.
What a sad day for Wayfarer! Staff indifference/incompetence and an Ambassador with good intentions but poor word selection have led one of the top 15 global Wayfarers to 'retire.'
I wish folks other than Elijustrying would take this seriously.
@cyndiepooh-ING your message has now appeared.
I appreciate how you are feeling. I had a substantial review break this year for 5 months, and have recently restarted. It was strange at first and I review at a tiny fraction of the volume you do. But personally I needed that space. I still was a wayfinder and helping others with my knowledge and experience is a positive aspect.
I hope you can feel welcome and valued here and can find your own way forward. Happy to support if you need it.
But why can't you vote like that? Why can't you lean towards positivity and growth? Why do you have to go into this with the precognition of looking for what you can reject, rather than accept? You seem dangerous and unfair with that mentality and frankly that scares me. Been noticing that a lot on here and I was afraid to say anything because the last person who did got jumped on by the others who think and act similarly to you, and that's really, really bad.
I don't think this type of behavior and thinking is healthy or positive at all... we should all just be trying to help and make this as great of an experience as possible for everyone.
You letting you know, I agree with you. Just because there are some vocal people on this forum doesn’t mean they are the majority.
Well, we are supposed to reject anything that meets any of the rejection criteria, OR anything that doesn't meet any acceptance criterion. I feel we ought to be rather charitable about acceptance, but a nomination is supposed to be either:
a )A great place to explore.
b) A great place to exercise.
c) A great place to be social.
So, if reviewers can see that at least one of these is true, or they can be persuaded by the submitting Wayfarer's text that it is so, it should be accepted. Some nominations don't seem to stand under any of the three points above.
You have no idea how I review. I don't go into anything "looking to reject"...I vote on every submission based on its individual merits. I've accepted far more than I've rejected. How does reviewing by criteria make me "dangerous and unfair"?
I wouldn’t go so far as to call it “dangerous”, but many people review by what they “think” is the criteria. Niantic themselves don’t even know the criteria. And as I’ve heard so many times “it’s their database”. So people are trying to find ways to reject things because they don’t like it that thumbs down isn’t enough to sink a nomination. Well too bad. Niantic created the review process.
Its possible to have positivity and growth while still reviewing correctly
A lot of things simply should not be accepted. All time, rejections account for 35% of my agreements and many reviewers are fairly close to that. The language you're using here is quite strong considering the topic and you seem to share a quite common misconception that the primary purpose of all of this is to make more pokestops wayspots but it isn't. the purpose is to determine whether each nomination meets the criteria niantic has set out for what they want.
India might disagree with you.
foursquare imports are completely separate from the criteria.
I refuse to let a sponsored input set the standards for what is eligible as a Wayspot.
That’s exactly the problem. Many reviewers have a higher standard than Niantic, and that makes no sense, it’s their database.
So you are saying we should not have any standards whatsoever because a sponsored import had no standards. Otherwise, you would not keep bringing up the sponsored import when talking about eligibility.
They are not sponsored.
India has just had McDonalds added as a sponsor. The India 4sq, if that's even where they are from, are not. They were added by Niantic onto the map. They directly effect Wayfarer in India. They will directly effect Wayfarer submissions, Wayfarer reviewers and the standard of Wayspots in India.
Could you post details about how you know they are 4sq imports, who paid for them, how long they will last, how they will effect current and future submissions in India, please.
The end of your previous sentence was "the criteria niantic has set out for what they want."
The important part is what they want.
Do they even know what they want? because adding all those wayspots in India, directly in Lightship sends a message to anyone around there that that's what they want.
An example of Wayfarers making rules beyond the actual instructions is the strong bias against restaurants, which can easily be great places to explore and socialize.
However, nothing about the guidelines says reviewers should or must accept things on the sole basis that they do not run counter to the rejection list. In fact, we are told not do this, but rather to assess how well they actually meet the acceptability criteria.
We're not supposed to accept plain street furniture, for example, even if we have seen it accepted before.
There is a lot of nuance that often gets lost. It is often missed even by the officials when they weigh-in on a controversial topic without due care.
We've never been instructed that we should rely on anything in the FourSquare intake as any kind of standard for anything. It seems to be a sort of b@st@rdized short-cut that somebody in a position of power has imposed on the database because he thinks it meets 'business interests.'
We are not supposed to use FourSquare as a model. In fact, they appear to be relying on the Wayfarer community to fix all of the photo, text, and location errors, while not honoring removal requests. It's a 'do as we say, not as we do' situation. It stinks, but that's how it is.