Improve the quality of judges or eliminate judges who do not meet the requirements.

Comments

  • kitunefree-PGOkitunefree-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    I have something I need to discuss, and that is the Pokestop review. More specifically, it is the disapproval of a Pokestop even if it meets the criteria for approval.

    We recognize that wayfarer is a feature to increase the number of Pokéstops for Pokémon go players in the first place. It makes sense that PokéStops created under the proper standards should be increased. But here is the first problem.

    That is, for some reason, even though they meet the approval criteria, they are sometimes not stamped with the seal of approval.

    Of course, it is not based on the obvious disapproval criteria, but rather on the three approval criteria.

    Funny, then, why is that? It is simple. It is because of the judges.

    Just to take an extreme example, for example, wayfarer has a pokestop upgrade feature, which gets you priority in judging, but to get this, you need to do 100% of the judging, and what a bad judge would do to get this, is simple.

    Anyway, the way to do it is to stamp the seal of disapproval in different ways, little by little, in different forms, in different ways, in different ways, in different ways, in different ways. That way they can get a priority ranking.

    CD until the next review?I won't go into details, but there are ways to handle it.

    It seems that many Pokéstops that should have been available are not being passed due to such screening.

    This is a big problem. Every Pokémon go player would like to have a PokéStop nearby, right? But we can't get it right. For a terrible reason. Everyone will be sad.

    What happens when Pokéstops are not available properly, creating more and more differences between urban and rural areas, and also creating a vicious cycle by reducing the active rate of Pokémon go players.

    I wonder if you guys have noticed something strange here. This feature was supposed to make players as happy as possible, but it has turned out to be a vicious cycle.

    However, they do have a point. The judges are volunteers. Sometimes we receive photos of individual glasses of individuals who are not familiar with the signage signs day in and day out. I also screened 1,233 objects in three days, and sometimes it got a little tiresome, especially when I was asked to screen duplicates, and sometimes I wished I could spend that time screening other PokéStops.

    Still, it should not be allowed to be disapproved due to abuse or personal judgment. These judges should be dealt with more forcefully.

    At the same time, it is important to improve the quality of judges to prevent such a situation from occurring. What do you think?

  • HauntedResearch-PGOHauntedResearch-PGO Posts: 70 ✭✭

    My problem with the judging is it seems like there isn’t much consensus between judges.


    I’m told on here if I say a place is popular I should prove it, so in the supporting photo I show the awards and ratings with the main photo being one I took of the place. Then it gets rejected for third party photo.


    It gets irritating because the process already takes months and to start from scratch when I did what was suggested is infuriating.

  • kitunefree-PGOkitunefree-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    Your opinion is very interesting and understandable. But the question remains.

    Wayfarer is not about "increasing the number of Pokestops. It is all about adding interesting and adventurous locations to the Lighthship database. 

    I understand that, which would result in more information being added to the Lighthship database and more spots on the Pokémon go game, no?

    As a result, I recognized that they meant the same thing, but I'll correct where I'm wrong.


    Also, I find that most people who complain about "bad rejections" overestimate the eligibility and acceptability of their nominations or believe that because X is a Wayspot, then a similar nomination must be accepted as well. But there is a reason we repeatedly tell other people not to use existing Wayspots as a guide to what is acceptable and not acceptable. Criteria changes or a Wayspot may have been incorrectly accepted in the past. But such Wayspots do not create a precedent for all other Wayspot nominations.

    This is also a story that makes a lot of sense. I used to run into people like this when I was doing my own judging.

    Some people said the reason for applying for a spot was I'm going to keep applying until I get a decent judge, until I pass the glasses I took in my room.

    I understand that as you say and as Niantic says, we are judging each gray area as an object to be cherished. I also understand that it is not possible to approve all the signs at once, even if it is just one sign.

    But let's say that what was applied for this time was decent, something that 70 out of 100 people would approve, and there was nothing wrong with the applicant. But if the jury disapproved the application, what would you think? Of course, we know that the reasons for selecting nominees are not uniform.


    For example, have you seen this url that often comes up in applications when you are reviewing?

    It's often written that since Niantic has granted approval using this, it should be allowed through as long as there is no falsification of location, etc., etc., etc., etc., but shall that not be uniformly approved?

    Another mistake I frequently see people make is believing that just because something meets the eligibility criteria, their nomination should be "immune" to any rejection criteria. This isn't the case. The rejection criteria apply to all nominations, regardless of whether they pass the previous two stages or not.

    And finally, some nominations are dependent on their presentation. For example, a cafe, coffee house, or restaurant isn't eligible just because it exists. The nominator needs to present an argument and evidence that shows that the business is not generic and ordinary. A poorly presented nomination of even an eligible object may still get rejected simply because the reviewer misunderstood what was being nominated.

    I think this is generally true.

  • kitunefree-PGOkitunefree-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    My problem with the judging is it seems like there isn’t much consensus between judges.

    I’m told on here if I say a place is popular I should prove it, so in the supporting photo I show the awards and ratings with the main photo being one I took of the place. Then it gets rejected for third party photo.

    It gets irritating because the process already takes months and to start from scratch when I did what was suggested is infuriating.

    I agree, it would be nice if we could confirm more people's intentions. And it's easy to get the same thing passed around during the screening process, so I'd like to see something done about that too.

  • Cowyn2016-PGOCowyn2016-PGO Posts: 331 ✭✭✭✭

    The forum is called Nomination Improvement. If you don't share and look for advice on if there is any mistakes on your end, go complain in General. Often there are mistakes on submitters end, or at least room for improvement.

    This forum is wonderful when used well. Recently I've been on a submitting kick. I'm averaging about 2 acceptances for each rejection. Each rejection I've posted on this forum. Got feedback. Resubmitted. And all for 1 have made it through. (Look for threads I've started for examples). The only 1 that got rejected a 2nd time, was one I was iffy on Church Directional Sign. But that was sorta a special case where I resubmitted only to test eligibility once I removed the "Lisence Plate" issue that was on first submission

  • kitunefree-PGOkitunefree-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    The forum is called Nomination Improvement. If you don't share and look for advice on if there is any mistakes on your end, go complain in General. Often there are mistakes on submitters end, or at least room for improvement.

    This forum is wonderful when used well. Recently I've been on a submitting kick. I'm averaging about 2 acceptances for each rejection. Each rejection I've posted on this forum. Got feedback. Resubmitted. And all for 1 have made it through. (Look for threads I've started for examples). The only 1 that got rejected a 2nd time, was one I was iffy on Church Directional Sign. But that was sorta a special case where I resubmitted only to test eligibility once I removed the "Lisence Plate" issue that was on first submission

    Thanks, that's a neat tip I didn't know.

    Let's go to the thread you started now!

  • FurtadoV-PGOFurtadoV-PGO Posts: 37 ✭✭

    This area of the forum is designed for individual sugestion on "Nomination Improvement". Your complaint appears to be a "General" one. Anyway, if you are not happy with the "judgment" of the reviewers in your nominations, do not forget that a appeal process direct to Niantic is available at this moment...

  • kitunefree-PGOkitunefree-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    This area of the forum is designed for individual sugestion on "Nomination Improvement".

    I had not noticed this. Then I shouldn't have talked about it here.

    Anyway, if you are not happy with the "judgment" of the reviewers in your nominations, do not forget that a appeal process direct to Niantic is available at this moment...

    Thanks, that's probably for the best. Or it looks like I should file an objection in another forum, as someone above mentioned.

  • kitunefree-PGOkitunefree-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    The reviewing is actually pretty good. It’s not perfect (see: Germany), but the vast majority of times that someone comes into these forums to complain about a rejection, they post their nomination and the reviewers were right. Sometimes a submission needs small tweaks, sometimes a complete overhaul, sometimes the whole thing was ineligible, but usually the nomination in its first draft was correctly rejected.

    That's an interesting story, but it makes sense, because it's not surprising that many eyes actually find many areas of correction.

    (Except, of course, those that are out of the question from the start.)

    The greater issue is that Niantic does not provide the necessary communication tools to clearly explain reviewer reasoning. I got three today that had a pin location in the middle of a street without sufficient information of where the correct location is (indoors, under trees, etc). Those nominators don’t even know what they did wrong and are going to be mad when they get their rejections back. It would probably help a lot if I could tell them what mistakes they made and what I would need in order to vote for approval, but unless they come in here and post their nomination I have no way of providing actionable feedback.

    I think correctly this is another point I would like to resolve. We don't know what went wrong because there is no feedback as to what went wrong. That's why they keep repeating the application over and over again, angrily asking why this one doesn't go through.

    It was refreshing to hear him quickly say what I was thinking, too.

  • kitunefree-PGOkitunefree-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    As someone above said, this seems to be the wrong thread here, so I'll leave it at that. Thanks for all the advice opinions. It has been very helpful.

Sign In or Register to comment.