New reviewer test
SirTinyDarwin-PGO
Posts: 3 ✭✭
Is it possible to create a new test that reviewers must pass based on the new criteria. A lot of reviewers still review based on the old criteria and do not want to accept that things have changed so better to have these people fail off the system than having valid nominations rejected the whole time.
Comments
What was it that was not accepted that makes you want to have a new test?
Nothing personally but my country has a relatively small player base and I'm om a wayfarer group that contains a sizable amount of reviewers and some of the older reviewers are openly against and pretty demeaning towards anyone wanting to submit things like coffee shops which is explicitly mentioned in the new criteria. I just want Niantic to adress the gatekeeping and seeing as the wayfarer systems require a lot of self study a new test is a start to force these people to atleast try and understand the new criteria.
Fair enough. I know even though cafe’s are specifically mentioned in the criteria you still have to offer some kind of proof to how they are unique or culturally relevant still. But fair point. I feel like theres that kind of mentality for a lot of things even when they did the ama’s to update criteria clarification people rejected based on there own beliefs of what should be the criteria
So my unique cafe and tavern subs have been rejected since the update, generic business as usual. Reviewers seem unaware of the change.
My suggestion is that there need to be business honeypots that, if you reject, you get a cooldown right away tanking your score. That way people could be corrected and learn in real time.
It's going to take a while. We had the same issue when playgrounds were first explicitly declaired eligaible by Niantic. But dispute knowing that, many reviewers were systematicly rejecting all playground nominations on the pretense that it encourages child predators.
Here, it took even longer for any sports fields or suchlike to be accepted locally. Tennis, basketball, baseball, you name it. We still haven't managed to get the single cricket pitch in the entire region accepted, but I wasn't the player who'd taken the photos and so cannot resubmit it myself.
I disagree with an instant cooldown if you reject a business submission. On a reviewer side we need to see some kind of evidence that makes said cafe/pub unique or a local hotspot. A link to local paper that mentions it or if you have a trip advisor thing saying that thats the place to go to in town. It would highly help your case. A lot of people when they submit a business (not saying you did) they don’t give anything tangible for supporting info and we have to rely on just there word. Thats why it was always impossible for cafe’s/pubs.
You can always submit nominations on your own as long as you can in i gress or pokemon go. Nothing is stopping you and generally the more people to submit the same location eventually it will go through
Tavern? I'm rejecting any premises where alcohol is sold.
@Maffemats-PGO
That's no how we're supposed to vote.
We're meant to reject bottle stops/**** clubs = places that are exclusively adult entertainment.
Taverns are family enterntainment areas, that are not excluaively alchohol related. Have always been eligible.
:(
I wasn't suggesting all business rejections should result in cooldowns/lowered score now.
I was suggesting we NEED business honeypots to fix the problem where people are rejecting highly significant eligible businesses.
They way honeypots work, is that Niantic sets the score, and if you vote againt Niantic you get penalised.
More frequent business honeypots are needed for teaching purposes.
Almost ever restaurant serves alcohol. Denying eligibility for that reason is not in line with Niantic's expectations. Previous guidelines made it clear that bars and pibs were eligible:
Pubs and Restaurants that serve alcohol (including mall food courts)
Acceptable: Eateries that have been featured prominently in travel guides, those with historical or cultural significance, or establishments that are popular tourist destinations. Establishments that serve alcoholic beverages like bars and pubs are acceptable.
Even in the 3.1 criteria, it is implied throughout that bars and pubs are still eligible:
A great place to be social with others
A favorite gathering place for friends or strangers alike, where you can share a drink or meal, be entertained, or watch public life happen.
And here:
Local Businesses
Generally speaking, local businesses that are considered long-standing watering holes, favorite hyper-local hangouts, or even more regionally recognized as a cultural hotspot, fall under the eligibility criteria of Explore and can be submitted for consideration and review.
In the rejection criteria, Niantic does state that liquor stores are ineligible.
Location is an adult-oriented store or service, such as a liquor store, **** range, firearm store, or provides **** and/or pornographic content
However, liquor store and alcohol serving establishment are not the same.
If people want to submit a coffee shop - fine. However, the onus is on them to prove it is more than just another "coffee shop", we need some evidence in the supporting info.
I disagree, I don't take pre 3.1 advice on this one. I think in recent training it implies they don't want play around areas where alcohol is sold. In terms of PGO there are a lot of younger players to consider. I'll continue to vote against premises where alcohol is served.
Niantic has never stated as such. In fact, Niantic stated in the previous criteria that establishments that serve alcoholic beverages like pubs and bars are acceptable (so long as they meet the criteria for a hyper-local spot). So that puts the lie that Niantic doesn't want play around those areas. The only place that sold alcohol that Niantic explicitly mentioned as being ineligible are liquor stores, and that language has carried over to Criteria 3.1. You can interpret "adult entertainment" as any establishment that requires proof of adulthood to enter or be served, but there are a lot of pubs and bars around the world that are accessible to entire families, including children.
Basically, this.
Any changes in criteria do take their time for reviewers to learn, let alone agree with. Allotments in the UK, when they were clarified as being okay wayspots, still faced a split in the UK Wayfarer community with some (such as myself) arguing that they're valid because of their communal value, the encouragement of outdoor activities, etc whereas others would still 1* them because "they're nothing special" (though I think they're better than the postboxes!)
In regards to the playground thing, whilst I understand the concerns, I think a child predator would probably find out where a playground is - with or without a game!
What about pubs in the UK? Aside from the fact that a lot have historic value (two in my town date back to the 16th century, another dates back to the Georgian period AND was used as a post office during in that period, another dates back to the Victoria era, etc), they're also generally good spots for meeting people, socialising, and they're a huge part of British culture. A good portion of then are also popular spots for day trippers, holiday makers, etc.
The test is only like 10 questions. Both reviewers AND SUBMITTERS should be given a new test every time the criteria changes (which used to be every month). That way everyone actually reads the rules and knows what changed