Depuis plusieurs mois j'essaie de valider le test pour pouvoir proposer un wayspot. Le test est impossible a faire, il est buggé apparemment. Les questions ne correspondent pas aux images, le compteur ne sincremente pas.
Can I get clarification on something in the rating system? Say we have a wayspot nomination that we’re reviewing, and it’s a bad nomination. It doesn’t fit any of the “one star rejection” categories , but it just isn’t interesting or good. I’ve been giving those two stars, with the intent that they don’t become a wayspot. If the nomination is rejected, does my two star count as an agreement? I’ve tried doing “one star - other rejection criteria’ instead, but my reviewer rating TANKED from great to fair
the fcommunity orum is just the place to come with questions like this…..the answers are not always obvious.
rating something as 2* is an overall accept. So if your rating was great it probably meant that although you thought it would be rejected it is likely it was accepted by the local community. Given your rating has dropped it is a good time to reflect.
You describe some things as no interesting or good. Wayfarer is all about judgements and terms like these are very subjective. Could you possibly take 2 or 3 screenshots of some examples of these sorts of nominations and post in the criteria clarification area and people can offer help.
This is an example that just popped up. It’s a lightpole, and the description says its noteworthy because its the only lightpole in the neighborhood. On top of the misspelled word in the title, this nomination is not visually unique, or of any great historic or cultural value. Yet it doesn’t fit any rejection criteria.
This is the sort of thing I switched to giving a one star, with the “other rejection criteria” but my rating fell. This leads me to believe other people are accepting nominations like this, but I can’t fathom why.
It’s also worth noting now that my rating is back up to great, I did some math, and I get agreements on roughly half of what I review. Granted, many of my reviews are probably still waiting for others to review, but I digress. That means roughly 40% of what I review isn’t an agreement. I don’t reject super often, but the time I did start rejecting nominations more ruthlessly is when my rating dropped. I don’t understand how I can be mis-approving 40% of my reviews, bur then also not getting agreements when I reject things more frequently. I just don’t understand what wayfarer wants from me at this point
That light pole does meet rejection criteria, "other rejection criteria" as you say you chose. It is not a great place to explore, exercise, or be social. It's a mass-produced random utility thing. It sounds like you're in an area like mine, with reviewers who are...overly generous? Blatantly avaricious? Really bad at reviewing? One of those, anyway. I'm hoping that @Elijustrying-ING and peers can maybe get your area looked at by Niantic to see if there's a pattern of collusion or improper reviewing - in the interim, I'd likely keep voting based on criteria and not by the effects on your rating. My rating also dropped into Good range as the locals were churning out weird judgements, but after a few weeks of minimal (one to five reviews per day, voting based on criteria, no skips) I was able to clamber back into Great status.
Currently, the status has dropped to GOOD, and I am also looking for recovery.
There are times when I have to continuously review low-level candidate sites such as candidate sites for mass-produced products, candidate sites with blatant supplementary explanations, and candidate sites whose locations cannot be confirmed.
I do find it interesting that something with a two star review is still considered overall acceptable. That’s very counter-intuitive. If I saw a two star review on a yelp review or product, I wouldn’t think “Well, it’s good enough for me!” If a two star is still counted as an acceptance, then what’s the point of having stars at all? If a one star is rejected and everything else is considered an accept, why not just have a “yes/no” or “accept/reject” option for the overall rating?
Wait what? How does the option between 3* (I don't know) and 1* (No) translate to Yes? That makes no sense. I would assume 2* translates to "I'm not sure, but I'm leaning towards No".
Rating Scale
You will be asked various questions about a nomination and answer by rating on a scale of one to five stars. In general, use the following guidelines when deciding how to vote:
If you strongly agree or if the information is accurate, choose 5 stars
If you are unsure or have no opinion, choose 3 stars
If the answer is definitely no, choose 1 star. If giving a 1 start to the first queston, "Should this be a Wayspot", select a rejection reason
We need to get rid of the star rating system asap.
I've always assumed that a 2* rating is still an accept but will credit less 'points' to it being accepted and that if it goes through I'll still get a +1 on an agreement.
These are kind of outdated, but I couldn't find anything contradicting them:
November 2018 Ingress AMA:
Q139: Could you comment on what the OPR rating stars actually mean? Our local chats have been debating this round and round again. Some say that 5* is full accept, 3* is unsure, 1* is reject, so therefore 2* is a rejection but not terrible, 4* is accepting but not 100% behind it. Others argue that 2* and up are acceptances, since 1* is the only reject.
A139: Three is considered neutral. Anything less is negative and anything above is positive. 1 being the most negative and 5 being the most positive.
Yes, they actually answered 139 questions in 1 AMA in those days.
December 11th 2017 Ingress AMA:
Q37: Is it true that when you give a portal 2 stars but it gets rejected, it counts as a disagreement?
A37: No.
Then, from the december 2021 Wayfarer AMA:
What is the purpose of 2 and 4 star ratings? - What should the 2 star and 4 star ratings be used for?
That is a great question - Initially the thought was to give you a range of response options to questions that are frankly pretty subjective in nature. But we are thinking about changing the question structure next year. A response scale doesn’t always fit the questions we’re asking. Some should simply be a yes/no. And star ratings shouldn’t be used as a proxy for rejections or ‘I don’t know’. So in short, they haven’t really been working the way we intended them to and they’ll be changing next year.
Not really answering anything. "Next year" has come and gone. Since this is such an important topic, and there still appears to be much confusion about it, maybe this is something the ambassadors could bring to the attention of the Wayfarer team again?
Hello.. I would like to begin (or join, if one already exists) a discussion on what constitutes bullying/harassment in active game play. Most specifically, I would like to discuss what can be done to identify, judge/prosecute, and reprimand or sanction agents who are actively engaging in bullying.
Currently, I only see action on "rude language". However, most of the incendiary comments are angry and exasperated responses to ACTUAL bullying in-game. The response is always to punish the VICTIM of the bullying for "losing their cool" and "being rude", which is effectively rewarding the bully for successful pushing their victim over the edge.
This is unacceptable. There needs to be better recourse for victims of bullying than venting in COMS.
If you’re talking about game play within a game you can take that to the game forums. As you’ve mentioned Agents, COMMS and have an ING tag, I’d suggest;
Thanks for raising this, as it is a serious issue and has a detrimental impact on the wayfarer community.
The first step Is to raise it using the support on the wayfarer site. This will then create a ticket number, do make a note of it. Provide as much information as you can. Let us know how it goes.
Comments
Post screenshots of them in a new post in the category I mentioned, and people can assist to see if they were eligible/acceptable Wayspots or not.
Use the paper clip icon for your images or they will need moderation approval.
Bonjour.
Depuis plusieurs mois j'essaie de valider le test pour pouvoir proposer un wayspot. Le test est impossible a faire, il est buggé apparemment. Les questions ne correspondent pas aux images, le compteur ne sincremente pas.
Merci de m'aider
I think there’s issues with it in other languages. Try it in English and translate things.
It's only really Wayfarer on here :)
You could try here though
Good
With how old some of these comments are, I’m not sure how often Niantic updates this page.
Can I get clarification on something in the rating system? Say we have a wayspot nomination that we’re reviewing, and it’s a bad nomination. It doesn’t fit any of the “one star rejection” categories , but it just isn’t interesting or good. I’ve been giving those two stars, with the intent that they don’t become a wayspot. If the nomination is rejected, does my two star count as an agreement? I’ve tried doing “one star - other rejection criteria’ instead, but my reviewer rating TANKED from great to fair
Hello and Welcome @Kaylee0712-PGO
the fcommunity orum is just the place to come with questions like this…..the answers are not always obvious.
rating something as 2* is an overall accept. So if your rating was great it probably meant that although you thought it would be rejected it is likely it was accepted by the local community. Given your rating has dropped it is a good time to reflect.
You describe some things as no interesting or good. Wayfarer is all about judgements and terms like these are very subjective. Could you possibly take 2 or 3 screenshots of some examples of these sorts of nominations and post in the criteria clarification area and people can offer help.
This is an example that just popped up. It’s a lightpole, and the description says its noteworthy because its the only lightpole in the neighborhood. On top of the misspelled word in the title, this nomination is not visually unique, or of any great historic or cultural value. Yet it doesn’t fit any rejection criteria.
This is the sort of thing I switched to giving a one star, with the “other rejection criteria” but my rating fell. This leads me to believe other people are accepting nominations like this, but I can’t fathom why.
It’s also worth noting now that my rating is back up to great, I did some math, and I get agreements on roughly half of what I review. Granted, many of my reviews are probably still waiting for others to review, but I digress. That means roughly 40% of what I review isn’t an agreement. I don’t reject super often, but the time I did start rejecting nominations more ruthlessly is when my rating dropped. I don’t understand how I can be mis-approving 40% of my reviews, bur then also not getting agreements when I reject things more frequently. I just don’t understand what wayfarer wants from me at this point
That light pole does meet rejection criteria, "other rejection criteria" as you say you chose. It is not a great place to explore, exercise, or be social. It's a mass-produced random utility thing. It sounds like you're in an area like mine, with reviewers who are...overly generous? Blatantly avaricious? Really bad at reviewing? One of those, anyway. I'm hoping that @Elijustrying-ING and peers can maybe get your area looked at by Niantic to see if there's a pattern of collusion or improper reviewing - in the interim, I'd likely keep voting based on criteria and not by the effects on your rating. My rating also dropped into Good range as the locals were churning out weird judgements, but after a few weeks of minimal (one to five reviews per day, voting based on criteria, no skips) I was able to clamber back into Great status.
How many reviews have you done?
When mine was at zero reviews recently it would ping back and forth between fair, great and good for a while.
It didn't really stabilize properly until I was back at 1,000+ reviews.
Currently, the status has dropped to GOOD, and I am also looking for recovery.
There are times when I have to continuously review low-level candidate sites such as candidate sites for mass-produced products, candidate sites with blatant supplementary explanations, and candidate sites whose locations cannot be confirmed.
~ 2400
Yes, once I switched back to two star acceptances over rejections, my rating jumped back up to great.
I do find it interesting that something with a two star review is still considered overall acceptable. That’s very counter-intuitive. If I saw a two star review on a yelp review or product, I wouldn’t think “Well, it’s good enough for me!” If a two star is still counted as an acceptance, then what’s the point of having stars at all? If a one star is rejected and everything else is considered an accept, why not just have a “yes/no” or “accept/reject” option for the overall rating?
Wait what? How does the option between 3* (I don't know) and 1* (No) translate to Yes? That makes no sense. I would assume 2* translates to "I'm not sure, but I'm leaning towards No".
Rating Scale
You will be asked various questions about a nomination and answer by rating on a scale of one to five stars. In general, use the following guidelines when deciding how to vote:
If you strongly agree or if the information is accurate, choose 5 stars
If you are unsure or have no opinion, choose 3 stars
If the answer is definitely no, choose 1 star. If giving a 1 start to the first queston, "Should this be a Wayspot", select a rejection reason
We need to get rid of the star rating system asap.
I've always assumed that a 2* rating is still an accept but will credit less 'points' to it being accepted and that if it goes through I'll still get a +1 on an agreement.
Odd that the criteria does not specify what happens on a 2 star rating. Or a four star rating, for that matter
These are kind of outdated, but I couldn't find anything contradicting them:
November 2018 Ingress AMA:
Q139: Could you comment on what the OPR rating stars actually mean? Our local chats have been debating this round and round again. Some say that 5* is full accept, 3* is unsure, 1* is reject, so therefore 2* is a rejection but not terrible, 4* is accepting but not 100% behind it. Others argue that 2* and up are acceptances, since 1* is the only reject.
A139: Three is considered neutral. Anything less is negative and anything above is positive. 1 being the most negative and 5 being the most positive.
Yes, they actually answered 139 questions in 1 AMA in those days.
December 11th 2017 Ingress AMA:
Q37: Is it true that when you give a portal 2 stars but it gets rejected, it counts as a disagreement?
A37: No.
Then, from the december 2021 Wayfarer AMA:
What is the purpose of 2 and 4 star ratings? - What should the 2 star and 4 star ratings be used for?
That is a great question - Initially the thought was to give you a range of response options to questions that are frankly pretty subjective in nature. But we are thinking about changing the question structure next year. A response scale doesn’t always fit the questions we’re asking. Some should simply be a yes/no. And star ratings shouldn’t be used as a proxy for rejections or ‘I don’t know’. So in short, they haven’t really been working the way we intended them to and they’ll be changing next year.
Not really answering anything. "Next year" has come and gone. Since this is such an important topic, and there still appears to be much confusion about it, maybe this is something the ambassadors could bring to the attention of the Wayfarer team again?
Hello.. I would like to begin (or join, if one already exists) a discussion on what constitutes bullying/harassment in active game play. Most specifically, I would like to discuss what can be done to identify, judge/prosecute, and reprimand or sanction agents who are actively engaging in bullying.
Currently, I only see action on "rude language". However, most of the incendiary comments are angry and exasperated responses to ACTUAL bullying in-game. The response is always to punish the VICTIM of the bullying for "losing their cool" and "being rude", which is effectively rewarding the bully for successful pushing their victim over the edge.
This is unacceptable. There needs to be better recourse for victims of bullying than venting in COMS.
If you’re talking about game play within a game you can take that to the game forums. As you’ve mentioned Agents, COMMS and have an ING tag, I’d suggest;
where you can raise a topic about it. You can also report in game.
Recently, I'm worried about harassment exchanges between Wayfinders.
The reasons for this include differences in interpretation of standards and demand for Wayspot between games (Ingress/Pokemon GO).
They are attacking each other inside and outside the community, such as deleting Wayspot, exposing, and vandalizing the explanation for it.
I'm not on either side, but I hope you don't get involved by sending irrelevant reviewers to vandalize the description.
Can the community or the Wayfarer team mediate between the two sides?
@82quuu-PGO
Thanks for raising this, as it is a serious issue and has a detrimental impact on the wayfarer community.
The first step Is to raise it using the support on the wayfarer site. This will then create a ticket number, do make a note of it. Provide as much information as you can. Let us know how it goes.
Sorry , I haven't kept up with that support.
I recently consulted with the administrator in this community about editing for vandalism, and it has been disposed of once.
However, vandalism edits are still seen sporadically.
In the second report I recently reported in the thread, the name of the target of retaliation came out, so I was investigating the facts.
Their main battleground is now on Twitter, where they exchange accusations against each other.
Thanks.
Will look into this further.
Hi, just wondering how long "being in jail" on these forums lasts. I've been in it since last September and I thought it would have gone away by now.
寶可夢=ingress ？
能量塔≠補給站
補給站=能量塔
Ingress =能量塔+補給站
寶可夢=補給站
It looks like it should have an expiration date.
Maybe it is set for a year or a higher amount of days?