Definition of voting to Accept or Reject

What's the definition of accepting/rejecting a nomination?

If you vote one star any where, do you automatically get counted as rejecting the nomination? For example, for a basketball court, baseball field, tennis court, any place that has no Historic or cultural significance and is not visually unique, if I vote like...

Should this be a Wayspot? 5

Title and Description 5

Historic or Cultural Significance 1

Visually Unique 1

Safe Access 5

does it get counted as me rejecting it?

I've got...

Total Nominations Reviewed 940

Nominations Accepted 196

Nominations Rejected 190

Nominations Duplicated 21

I got a Fair score. It's looking like something in my voting is making me disagree with the other voters. My own nominations have nearly a 100% rate of being approved, so I obviously know what would be a good Wayspot! Instead I end up with a four hour/day ban!


  • patsufredo-PGOpatsufredo-PGO Posts: 1,931 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If you rate 1* to a criteria (at your example, you give 1* to historical/cultural significance and visually unique) them it would lead to instant rejection, even if you give 5* to overall rating. You're most likely reviewing in a wrong way, hence you got a cooldown.

    Sport fields and playgrounds should not to be rated 1*-2* on their historical/cultural significance and visually unique, even if you think they're not unique at all.

  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 537 ✭✭✭✭

    Is this correct? I use Wayfarer+ and the tracker only marks as rejected those I rated 1* and 2* in the first question and I think that question is the only one that counts towards an agreement. The others may influence the result somehow but it isn't clear to me that they do.

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If the nomination is rejected and you gave any category a 1-2* rating you’d get an agreement for the rejection.

    If you give 1-2* on any category its a rejecting rate. Many people on the forum will agree with this lol

  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 537 ✭✭✭✭

    Yes, but the point is not what the people think the system is, but what it actually is. Is that mechanic stated in writing somewhere, was deduced by experimentation and posted by someone or is just a widely accepted guess with no basis on any solid information?

  • toniukupaoni-INGtoniukupaoni-ING Posts: 41 ✭✭
    edited January 2021

    You can get rejection reasons for both categories. Something in the line of "Doesn't appear to be visually unique" and " Doesn't appear to be historically or culturally relevant". Which suggests you can reject the nomination by giving low rating in any of the two categories. I've had multiple nominations rejected with only one of the two mentioned rejection reason. Usually coincidence with Niantic lowering level so more players can begin reviewing.

  • SeaprincessHNB-PGOSeaprincessHNB-PGO Posts: 217 ✭✭✭✭

    NOTHING IS STATED IN WRITING ANYWHERE ABOUT HOW ANY OF THIS WORKS. Niantic works from the premise that the more information you give people, the easier it will be for them to game the system. So they leave us to stumble around in the dark and figure it out for ourselves. This system has been in place for years and enough people have used it that we have their experience to draw from.

    YES. It works as described to you. A 1* or 2* rating in any part of the nomination means you are rejecting it. It doesn't matter what overall rating you give the nomination.


  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 537 ✭✭✭✭

    I don't have a reason for not believing you, but if I take it as true that means I have rejected almost everything so far as I normally equate 1* with "the question is not relevant to this nomination" and 2* with "barely", particularly on either visual uniqueness or cultural relevance. Somehow that doesn't seem to match what happened to the nominations or my reviewer rating.

    Anyway, while I understand the need of not revealing exactly how the system works, some better guidance is needed to avoid accidently rejecting things that we mean to be approved.

  • KwyjiboHan-PGOKwyjiboHan-PGO Posts: 113 ✭✭✭
    edited January 2021

    Reviewers shouldn't second guess the workings of the Niantic algorithm and just be honest in their reviews. I'm being honest, I'm not ALL CAPS VOTING INCORRECTLY.

    Niantic have changed their POI criteria to allow for wayspots of no cultural/historic value. If I 5* gym equipment in a park, but 1-2* its historic/cultural value, it's because I'm following the official guidelines -

    Niantic have changed their criteria. I'm not going to be dishonest based on out of date guess work from before the change.

  • SeaprincessHNB-PGOSeaprincessHNB-PGO Posts: 217 ✭✭✭✭

    YOU ARE NOT VOTING CORRECTLY IF YOU 1* OR 2* CULTURAL RELEVANCE FOR PARK GYM EQUIPMENT. The link you gave does not tell you that gym equipment is NOT culturally relevant. It just says that a 100 year old library is MORE culturally relevant than gym equipment.

    Think about Niantic's own mission statement.

    "Niantic’s mission is to use emerging technology to enrich our experiences as human beings in the physical world. We build products that inspire movement, exploration, and face-to-face social interaction. By turning the world itself into a game, we hope to motivate our players to head outside, visit new places close to home and far away, to see the world with new perspective, and to play together with friends and family in games that span and unite the entire planet."

    Does gym equipment get people to do any of those things? Then it is culturally relevant. It absolutely inspires movement, gets people to head outside, and maybe some of the other things listed. It may not be a 5* like the library, but it is at least a 3* because it helps meet the goals of Niantic's mission.

  • KwyjiboHan-PGOKwyjiboHan-PGO Posts: 113 ✭✭✭
    edited January 2021

    Nowhere in any definition in any dictionary anywhere are you going to see "inspires movement" as being culturally relevant.

    I'm more likely to move my bowels where there is a toilet. 3* from Seaprincess.

    Reviewers should be honest and interpret the instructions as given in plain English. You should ignore anyone who tells you otherwise based on their reading of the tea leaves.

  • Kroutpick-PGOKroutpick-PGO Posts: 360 ✭✭✭

    The Page you are referencing also says :

    "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, choose 5 stars
    • If you are unsure or have no opinion, choose 3 stars
    • If the answer is definitely no, choose 1 star and select a rejection reason"

    "Cultural" is not strictly related to "arts and culture", it's a large concept : ex.

    As an addition to the last comment from @SeaprincessHNB-PGO : anything that brings people to exercice, explore or socialize will have at least 3* for its "Historic or Cultural Significance".

    Same thing for the "Visual Uniqueness" rating, I agree with @Jtronmoore-PGO

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 2,802 Ambassador

    @NianticCasey-ING you've hinted at a few times lately that the way we review may be changing Soon™, but I think you'll understand that this debate is one we've been passionate about for years. Could you please offers some clarification on the topic? I've had a few nominations denied for "not being culturally or historically significant" or "not being visually unique," and I have friends who have had churches denied for the same reasoning, too.

    Is it appropriate to use "personal opinion" and give churches or playgrounds 1* ratings in culture/visual even if the rest of the nomination is generally passable?

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    When reviewing we already know that if you get a rejection for any reason it doesn’t matter if its 5* in any category. 1 rejection reason would make the whole vote fail. 1/5 star or 2/5 are both failing grades.

  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 537 ✭✭✭✭

    I've been pondering on my reviewing process and I think a possible explanation is what I came to call "The 2* Treatment".

    When reviewing I normally follow a patern of evaluating Rejection Criteria first, then Acceptance Criteria. Anything meeting Rejection Criteria will get 1* in the first question. That means I never rate 1* in the Title, Location or Pedestrian Access questions because 1* there goes directly to the first question, with reasons stated there. I also 1* in the first question submissions that fail Elegibility hard, usualy for one of the predefined reasons and more rarely for "other rejection criteria".

    Now, submissions that just fail the aceptance test get 2* (or 3* if I think they barely meet them). In that case they would get a full review but the only questions that would have a low score would be Cultural or Historic Significance and/or Visually Unique. So if other reviewers do the same as me when evaluating the submission, the agreement would be 2*, rejected, and the stated reason would be that either isn't culturally significan or isn't visually unique which, when it comes to think about it, correctly describes a submission that doesn't trigger Rejection, meets Elegibility but fails Acceptance.

  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 537 ✭✭✭✭

    I wrote a longer comment that I made disappear somehow, but I think that what may trigger "Visual Uniqueness" or "Cultural or Historical Significance" as rejection reasons are 2* agreements.

    I normally rate anything that triggers Rejection Criteria or fails Elegibility Criteria as 1* in the first question, but submissions that don't trigger Rejection, meet Elegibility but fail Acceptance would get 2*. In those cases, the rejection emails will probably state "Visual Uniqueness" and/or "Cultural or Historical Significance" as rejection reason, as they would be the only failed questions.

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 1,923 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Jtronmoore-PGO wrote:

    When reviewing we already know that if you get a rejection for any reason it doesn’t matter if its 5* in any category. 1 rejection reason would make the whole vote fail. 1/5 star or 2/5 are both failing grades.

    We do not know that. Some people believe it, but that does not mean that it is unquestionably true. Here's an example of something we know: The number of reviewers required for a submission is not fixed, and depends partially on the rating of the reviewers. How do we know that? Niantic told us.

    Because there is no way to identify all of the reviewers for any submission there is no way to do a controlled experiment to prove or disprove that assertion. Until we can, or until Niantic tells us otherwise, it's a belief rather than knowledge.

Sign In or Register to comment.