Stop asking for "pokestops" in supporting information!
Mxx-ING
Posts: 156 ✭✭✭
It is so freaking annoying constantly seeing people beg for "pokestops" in supporting information field! (I'm not even talking about in the description, that is instant 1 star rejection.)
Every time I see a submission complaining that they don't have enough stops in their town and kids have nothing to play with, I instantly judge that submission a lot more harshly than I would have otherwise!
If you want your submissions to be reviewed fairly, submit them on their own merit, and without complaining that you can't catch enough pikachus! Give me actual supporting information why this painted half-buried tire should be accepted.
Post edited by NianticGray on
Tagged:
Comments
Asking the reviwere for positive ratings is consittered abuse and can get the submitter banned.
Report every time you see them. It will have effect in year 2044, maybe.
Id say if its already an iffy nomination go ahead and reject but I have a hard time seeing you reject actual eligible nominations just because of bad supporting info. As long as the description/pictures are fine
Direct your frustration towards Niantic. Nomination process in Pokemon asks players to
"Explain why you believe your Pokestop nomination is important and what trainers will see there."
Those not familiar with the reviewing system are just answering that. Irritating yes, understandable also.
Not a single example the OP mentions are considered "influencing reviewer" and cause for a report!
Judge the nomination based on the nominated object. The supporting information box is there for just that, supporting information. If they use it to complain about the lack of POIs that's their choice. It doesn't help the nomination and they wasted their chance to use it for something meaningful but if the nomination is otherwise eligible then review it normally.
Niantic does a fairly poor job at educating submitters, so the quality of nominations will suffer from that. That's not the submitters fault.
You are trying to send a message to people that doesn't know that this forum exists.
The real problem is the lack of information that Niantic provides as stated by the previous comments.
They don't care about it, they want to get their pokestop only. I think Niantic has some issues about it. They must change any pokestop reference on POI's nomination section in Pokemon GO app.
I've said this before...
If it's in the supporting info, I may look at it dimly, but I'm not going to 1* it out of hand because the supporting info mentions it. Nobody except the reviewer sees it.
But I will agree that there have been plenty of times I have seen it where it turns out someone is just trying to get a couch stop/gym or something of the sort. It isn't always the case, but it has usually been a pretty good tip off someone is trying to game the system.
Yes, it's best to leave it out of the supporting info (we can obviously see if an area is devoid of stops/gyms/portals/wayspots/whatever), but I'd not disqualify a nomination for that alone, not unless someone got real stupid and put it in the main title/descrpition.
Unless the supporting info helps me find the POI, or provides more information about the nominated POI, I generally ignore it.
Then why are you reviewing nominations for pogo/ingress if your not helping the community make a better gaming experience for all players OP?
You obviously either play ingress, or made it to level 38 in pogo...
There is a widespread perception that, on average, Ingress players care about the overall quality of the POI database and Pokemon players just care about gaming the system to get more local Pokestops and gyms.
Back before PoGo players could nominate POI I was telling a group of my local PoGo raiders about a really cool POI I'd submitted, one of the ones I'm proudest of, and how I'd stood there in the rain for 5 minutes looking up information to write a really good description of how important this interesting person was.
It happened to be in another state, in a place I'm unlikely to go back to. So two of the PoGo players asked, in all honesty, "why did you bother? It won't help you!"
That's the kind of attitude that makes people mad.
Second point you made is absolutely necessary !
I’m not an ingress player so I generally look for nominations that will obviously appear in my game of choice. I like hearing feedback from the local community on how good of a job I’ve done and how its made the game much more playable. There was a lot of high quality poi’s never submitted in my city alone. So to see people enjoying the poi’s I have gotten into the game makes me happier than anythinng else really
El problema es cuando has solicitado una parada 16 veces por más de un jugador y siempre la deniegan y les explicas por qué es válido si eso lo consideras una queja yo creo que está justificada
Having a nomination rejected 16 times has nothing to do with begging for stops though. They're separate issues.
Certain comments, relating to need more stops in area, can have a negative effect on nomination approval.
A good reviewer will try and find a reason to make something a stop/portal
i dont mind the word pokestops in the support information, in the end 99.999999999...infinite...9999999999...infitnite% of submissions are because pokemon go, if they want to beg or not use useful information in that area SHOULD NOT BE A REASON FOR YOU TO REJECT....REVIEW ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES BECAUSE IN NO PLACE OF THE GUIDELINES IS SAID ''IF THE WORD POKESTOP IS IN THE SUPPORT INFORMATION YOU MUST INSTANT REJECT''
we all know i am right, hail to me
Just try to be as honest as you can. Hail Hail
I think the real issue is not using the word "stop" or occasionally "portal" in submissions. Rather, it's the attitude that often underlies these requests.
"Need more stops", "need a stop here", or the especially egregious, "Five people in the office play and we need a stop to load up on pokeballs", all come from the same misunderstanding of how the wayspot system works. These folks don't really understand that the idea is to find qualifying and high-quality candidates and submit them. Rather, these submitters think there should be a stop wherever it's convenient for them, so they'll hunt around and submit whatever they can find nearby in the hopes that maybe something will go through and they'll get their couch/desk stop.
Certainly the players doing this should certainly shoulder some of the blame-- the wayspot criteria are available and easy to find, but these players haven't invested much in learning. Some of the responsibility also belongs to Niantic, since the guidance during the submission process is less than ideal and the only qualification step for submitting new candidates is leveling up. Communities also contribute to the problem... I often see someone asking about the eligibility of a clearly non-qualifying candidate only to be told, "Submit it anyway since it might go through."
To be fair, sometimes "need more stops" just comes from people reading the guidance that's on the screen during the submission process, as has been pointed out above. Often, though, it's just someone flinging coal into the system in the hopes that they'll get a convenient stop.
I have no problem in asking for a Pokestop / Portal but you are missing a trick.
The supporting information is there to help reviewers understand why something is important. Sure some things are always slam dunk before I get to that point I would look there (churches etc) but some questionable ones can be swayed with information or even a URL. If you don’t give it just don’t moan when we think your nomination is generic.
Si se ha solicitado más de 16 veces y se ha negado hay posibilidad que están solicitando basura. 🤷♂️ Buscan cosas de mejor calidad.
This is quite possibly my biggest annoyance in Wayfarer. Thank you for posting this.
💯
A separate wayfarer app would be better, with all criteria and access to your nominations, their state and this forum.
To me they've just wasted the words available to them. It doesn't affect my review rating although it tells me I'm probably going to be scoring this one low.
Today I reviewed a playground nomination, it was a perfect nomination in terms of eligibility, but clearly not written by someone who frequents these forums. The supporting information mentioned more stops but it didn't matter - it got 5*s from me because it was an eligible waypoint and I'm perfectly happy to grant the request for more stops for waypoints like this.
I don't care if someone ask for more stop. That have no effect on the quality of nomination.
Someone who wrote that simply lost time and space to explain why his nomination is good.
A si que un parque es basura? Lo que pasa es que los revisores están denegando todo lo que se pide en los pueblos de montes de Toledo
That is definitely one of my irritations as well. It does, however, work to the disadvantage of the submitters. If I'm uncertain about the value of a submission and I was thinking about doing some extra looking to see how good the POI is, but then in the supporting info they blatantly say they want to be able to play at work, then it usually means that what was submitted is the entire face value and I've stopped putting extra effort in on those ones. If they are clearly good then they are good. If they are clearly bad they are bad. If they are iffy it's really tough to get behind the thoughts of someone who doesn't really care about the quality of the submission.
I strongly believe there is a way to make submitting a more rewarding experience for players regardless of the game, but it needs to be motivation based. A reward system based on a history of good submissions could provide more incentive to self-learn what makes a valuable POI. It appears that changing the Pokémon Go nomination submissions would be especially valuable to the community. Even if it would improve things just a little I think it would go a long ways.