It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
I just had this nomination rejected:
It's a padel court. Visible on Satellite View, in a public park. I even provided a link to an article about this exact court being installed in the supplemental information.
The description says "One of the first padel courts in Hungary", which is true and relevant IMO. Sure, it's not the best, but I was expecting a public and visible sports field to be an easy acceptance and didn't put too much effort into it.
Normally I wouldn't worry about it too much, I've already renominated it with a better description. But now that I may actually be banned because of this, I'm much more nervous.
So please @NianticGiffard @NianticDanbocat @NianticTintino respond to this thread. This is a legitimate concern.
Apologies for addressing this matter late, @Nadiwereb-PGO.
Please note that we do not hand out warnings/punishments for rejections. A warning/ban is handed out only when we have conclusive evidence after a manual review that the player in question has submitted abusive nominations or nominations that are in clear violation of our policies.
Alright. Even if that's true, some huge issues remain.
First: the emails say the ban is for "submitting nominations that do not meet criteria". There is nothing about abuse in there. Please re-word these emails so that they're much, much more clear.
Second: unfortunately the track record of Ninatic reviewers is far from perfect, you can quite clearly see that from all the successful appeals against their rejections. If these are the same people who decide whether someone submits abusive nominations, I'm not too optimistic about this.
Third: tell submitters what they did wrong. Especially if you manually review these cases. Give them information. That's how you can ensure that they won't do it again. Also, if you want to build trust towards the system, these disciplinary measures have to be transparent. Your reviewers and staff sometimes make mistakes, you yourself have confirmed that on this forum many times, and this is perfectly normal. To quote Theodore Roosevelt: "The only man who makes no mistakes is the man who never does anything". But these decisions should be possible to appeal, but at the very least they should be made more clear for the submitter to be able to learn from it.
So the thread just went from ‘NIANTIC IS A MALICIOUS DICTATOR THAT INCARCERATES AND EXECUTES THEIR COMMUNITY FOR MINOR OFFENSES’ to ‘could you please communicate more clearly?’
The community has been requesting more and clearer communication forever, with only minor success.
Some commenter noted something similar back on page one:
No, if you read my comments, I've been arguing the same thing all the way.
The thread was always asking for better communication. Myself and others who had an honest and principled critiaque of Niantic never used the word dictator or dictatorship and we never claimed Nianitc executed anything. You keep trying to strawman arguments in this topic, and I'm not sure why.
The comment from Niantic is welcome. I don't trust Niantic still but it's nice to be acknowledged at least. As @Nadiwereb-PGO says, you would do a good job to read the prior comments in this topic. I believe we have been consistent.
This response above...
is quite the contrast to this response (the second half only, not about the trail marker candidacy):
I want the nominations that are being flagged for abuse actually manually reviewed or even shoved to the wayside away from reviews for manual review. There are countless and numerous fakes and abusive nominations that I have rejected and flagged for abuse over and over again for the past couple of months to no end and it seems the submitter is never penalised. When they use a clearly third-party photo to nominate something near their house or it's a screenshot... a ridiculous amount of times. Or a certain bird cage or extremely generic restaurant, that I kid you not, has been submitted in the double digits now in an attempt to get another couch, that should be easily identified as spamming inappropriate nominations but is never reviewed in mid-review to this day. I have to post here for action to be done.
I'm grateful that action is taken on Wayfinders who abuse the system with photo reviews and abusive edits and location stuff, but it just seems nomination spam is not actioned. Think of a submitter submitting the exact ugly same blurry low quality photo and rejecting it for low quality photo... every time... until it's about the 4th time they've submitted the photo as if they are legally blind, to which it just becomes a cesspool of abuse and they refuse to take a new photo of it and just crop it again and again and again and again... and nothing visibly happens.
My own two cents: It took 5 tries each on two trail markers to get them accepted. I knew they were eligible, and kept resubmitting, adding a bit more information each time, such as comments on this forum about trail markers. So in addition to burning 10 upgrades to get two Wayspots in game - nothing moves here without an upgrade - to find out I might be getting banned from Wayfarer for resubmitting these incorrectly rejected nominations is scary. Please add the reasons for the ban to the email so the ban can be appealed.
Another (not only one, but two) bans without clear reason.
Some context to this thread:
The OP keep nominated a comic/game store up to 17 times, only for all of them to be rejected. OP didn't show its decsription and supporting information, but on his 2nd attempt he told his nomination was rejected because it's fake. The second user was banned for appealing a mural on PRP (well, his fault).
@NianticGiffard why would a submitter got banned because he/she was caught for "spamming ineligible nominations" while it's not, meanwhile the reviewers only got rating drop or 4h/24h cooldown for giving false rating to nominations (i.e. rejecting nominations that shouldn't be rejected, selecting incorrect rejection reasons, or approving nominations that shouldn't be accepted instead)?
Not only that: people are being actively rewarded for rejecting eligible or borderline eligible ("grey area") stuff with agreements.
I have reviewed a certain restaurant at least 6 times by now. It's a good nomination - the submitter provided links to tourism sites, proved that it's a historic place opened around a century ago, proved that it has live concerts and community events. Still, it appears to have zero chance. I myself have thought that I should reject it if I wanted to keep my rating intact, even if I know it's eligible according to criteria. I think I skipped it the last couple of times, actually.
This is what's really infuriating: you might get punished for something that's not abusive at all, while reviewers actively disregarding criteria is completely risk-free.
And this is mostly Niantic's fault for not communicating properly. I've seen a lot of posts about bans for submitting invalid nominations - I have yet to see a single disciplinary measure given for rejecting eligible things or using false reasons. Important clarifications are hidden on this forum that most people don't even know about, and even here they're hard to locate. Major changes in criteria can be - and are - ignored because reading up on them is not compulsory. Many reviewers saw the disappearance of the "Generic business" rejection reason but didn't even think of it twice and continue to reject every business for various reasons.
The appeal system would be a great step towards balancing things out - if it worked, that is. Also, even appeals won't fix the underlying issue - inconsistent and ineffectual communication. Please, @NianticTintino @Danbocat-PGO and any others who might have the power to shift priorities: fixing communication issues should be priority number 1. (And 2, and 3.)
Well all you have to do is look to see what's been rejected? If you think it might be eligible even so, then ask in the nomination improvement forum for advice on how to re-present it.
That assumes people know about this forum. There are people I know who have nominated things and were not even aware there was a website where they could keep track of the nominations. The fact there are people who nominate who do not even know what Wayfarer even is... well it's shocking really. Niantic does not do a good job of advertising Wayfarer.
I think these are done automatically (not by a person) to Explorers who nominate the EXACT SAME THING over and over - same pictures and text. If you get 15 rejections on completely different things, you're OK. If you get 15 rejections on the same thing, but each has unique photos and wording, you're OK. But if you make the exact same nomination 15 times - you're spamming (regardless of whether it's accepted).
Yes, it would be nice if the emailed defined the charge of "spamming". But if such a person gets an email that they're spamming nominations, they know what they've done. Even if they act like they don't.
@MargariteDVille-ING You know what happens when you submit something that already has been submitted in the same S2-lvl17 cell?
As @rodensteiner-ING is saying, you seem to fail to understand how Niantic populates the "gameboard" and that most players are ignorant of how the gameboard is populated (because Niantic is against educating its customers, for some reason). The average Pokémon GO player is not using the Ingress Intel Map to check what has been nominated already.
Add to that, there is no way of checking Lightship only Wayspots. They cannot be edited at all, and will only appear in the "potential duplicates map" within Wayfarer. Thus, they do not even appear in Ingress, which has the most liberal Wayspot rules out of all of the Niantic games.
Perhaps do some research before getting angry and jumping to conclusions?
AScarletSabre-PGO It has nothing to do with existing duplicates or gameboard. It is about ONE NOMINATOR nominating:
Picture A, Title B, Description C, Supporting Picture D, Supporting Information E
This nominating pattern in SPAMMING THE SYSTEM.
I am now on my 10th attempt to get a community garden accepted. It has a website that lists the community features (great place to be social) and a name sign that includes the precise address. Still, it gets rejected for the most ridiculous reasons. I'm also on the fourth attempt with a public playground that's been rejected 3 times for "not visually unique". As appeals don't seem to be working, I will re-nominate these until they get accepted. And again: these are not "grey-area" stuff or objects that are traditionally hard to get accepted like restaurants or shops. These are 100% eligible.
I refuse to accept a system where having eligible (or even borderline eligible, grey-area) things rejected can get the nominator banned, no matter how many rejections there are.
So @MargariteDVille-ING what Happens Then? Tell us
Eligible firstly does not mean that you have nominated it correctly, and secondly does not mean it is acceptable to reviewers.
I often see trail markers I have to reject for several possible reasons. For example, text copied from a web site. As per other discussions, reviewers don't find the self adhesive type acceptable at all.
Trying to unpick all this 😎
Since Niantic won’t actually tell what is fact and what is fiction everything has to have the rider that this is what we think we know.
The flow from submission (in queue) to review pool (in voting) is controlled. There is a limit, using S2 cells, to prevent multiple submissions moving to the pool from the one area - presumably to stop one area flooding the pool and dominating. This means roughly if you submit either the same spot or a few close together only one will enter voting. The rest remain in queue.
So in this sort of case there shouldn’t be multiples of the same point in the voting pool at the same time. There are cases where people seem to get the same submission to review over a long period of time - a Groundhog Day effect. it could be what appears to be multiple submissions is 1 caught in this circle.
It is perfectly possible that someone with a marginal POI submits the same submission all in one go ….. essentially putting them all in the queue waiting for a space to move to the voting pool. It’s an odd thing to do as it assumes you have the perfect submission and won’t want to change it. Even in this case there is random element that selects which one waiting in the queue will go to voting so other submissions could move through.It is possible due to glitches to end up submitting something multiple times by accident or because of a bug - I once submitted 3 of the one point.
And finally many of us have good cases that have needed repeated submissions to get something through and the standard advice is resubmit.
From the point of view of the reviewer we can’t know for sure what is actually happening.
We should be able to get Niantic staff to investigate - it is wrong to assume abuse when there are plenty of innocent explanations - by looking carefully at what is happening in those cells with those submissions.
If reviewers did not make up their own rules when reviewing and actually followed the criteria as laid out by Niantic, there would be a lot less spamming in the system I'm sure. There are plenty of things which are nominated in a good faith, but because some reviewers hold the belief they know better than Niantic, they continue reject things which Niantic may have even explicitly said are eligible.
P.s. Please show us this "spam nomination" as you put it. If it's something obviously rejectable then I can only hope the nominator can get more educated. However, if it's merely a nomination that you do not want to see in game because you believe you have higher standards than Niantic themselves, then I have no sympathy.
I am glad they finally did this. I am not saying you did wrong but some of the ones I got were houses, peoples room, Chicago cub flags, fake free library's at homes, fake trail markers at home, beer mugs, fire places, people taking pictures of them self's, fake foot bridges. I am tired of it. 75% are all fake, wrong title, bad photo etc. But the 25% that are real should get excepted and stop rejecting every nomination that comes threw.
Imagine submitters are being banned because of false reviews from incompetent reviewers like this:
Another (again) bans without clear reasons:
And, another (again) generic, unhelpful response from Niantic:
And I feel every Niantic responses are utterly nonsense. The ban is Wayfarer-related, why did they ask the user to appeal the ban in Ingress forum contact the GO support team? Even if support team at least replied with, "...you have submitted ineligible nominations" or something like that, did they know which nominations or edits are the cause of the suapension?
Niantic believe when the police arrest a person, that idividual should not be told why are being arrested. Forget about due process and a fair trial. Niantic want none of that.