rejection of unreasonable or incorrect reasons

Recently, there have been a number of rejections in my region for unreasonable reasons. For example, my nomination in university was denied by "K-12". The rejection reason “K-12 “is used for under school (preschool, primary/elementary, secondary/high school), child care/daycare center, rehabilitation center, safety shelter, not for use within university facilities. Also, my nomination was clearly accessible on foot but this nomination was rejected by “The real-world location of the nomination could not be confirmed to have an acceptable pedestrian pathway leading up to it.”. I suspect that there is a lot of miscellaneous review or abuse in my area. I would like Niantic to investigate this issue or abuse.

 

Also, I have interested in November AMA's

https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/10321/november-ama-your-questions-answered/p1

What is being done to curb incorrect rejections for nominations that meet all of the criteria? Will there be a way to escalate incorrect rejections directly to the Niantic team for re-review?

Firstly, we are in the midst of redesigning the nomination review process to make the review process smoother for reviewers and also to cut down on these incorrect rejections. Also, on the horizon, although a bit further out, is adding appeals directly into Wayfarer. With regard to escalating incorrect rejections directly to Niantic, this is something that we’re thinking through. It’s a bit complex as we don’t want to enable correct rejections to be escalated so it’s still a work in progress.

 

Niantic, how much progress has been made on this?

Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I doubt Niantic will ever let you escalate rejections to them. That would essentially put them back in the business of doing a lot of the reviews in-house, and that's an expensive proposition.

    It's well-documented that rejection reasons in email are not a reliable reflection on why the submission was rejected. It seems plausible that some of the reasons could be as simple as either someone mis-clicking on the rejection reason or deliberately choosing an incorrect reason. The reasons do not change the fact that reviewers chose to reject the submission. While you might find a clear signal in the rejection email the real takeaway is that reviewers didn't think your submission should be in the games.

    When I get a rejection for something that I legitimately think should have been approved I use that as an opportunity to evaluate my submission and also improve my submission skills. I pretend I'm a reviewer myself and ask questions like, "What was unclear to the people who reviewed this?" "How can I make this submission better?" "What would make it easier for reviewers to understand and approve the submission?" Once I've availed myself of the learning opportunity II submit it again, only this time better than the first one.

    I wrote this article on improving submission quality a few months ago. You may find it useful.

  • Perringaiden-INGPerringaiden-ING Posts: 124 ✭✭✭

     It seems plausible that some of the reasons could be as simple as either someone mis-clicking on the rejection reason or deliberately choosing an incorrect reason.

    For the longest time, you could hit many of the reasons without typing, and Doesn't Meet Criteria required typing. So many of those people who hated typing a reason, got trained into picking randomly something else.

    Even now that nothing requires typing, they continue to pick randomly, because they've never looked back at the Other Criteria Reason option again.

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

    Can we see pictures of your nomination if you want help with it? Really hard for anyone to form an opinion without all the facts in front of us

  • silverkali-INGsilverkali-ING Posts: 92 ✭✭✭

    I think a lot of reviewers still don't understand the K-12 rating as it has no real bearing outside of the US. The mandatory schooling age is different in different countries. I've struggled getting PoI on University campuses or in adult-only colleges approved in the past too and I know lots of other submitters have too.

  • BleedBoss-PGOBleedBoss-PGO Posts: 269 ✭✭✭

    I would say this is an ongoing issue, but recently i was enlightened, and as such, i can conclude that this is a non-issue. Niantic will not curb out incorrect rejections because it's up to the reviewer to vote however he best sees fit. And if some reviewers in particular thought that a university didn't have pedestrian access, then you can't really judge them on their opinion. As for K12, maybe in their country High School is the equivalent of University, which would also lead to a correct rejection on their half, based on their reality. Subjectivity is good because it provides so much wiggle room where one can take a narrative and spin it in order to reject or accept a POI.


    Also, blanket rejecting also provides faster upgrades than actually properly evaluating, which is a positive for players!

  • silverkali-INGsilverkali-ING Posts: 92 ✭✭✭

    I'd disagree with your last paragraph, mass rejection isn't positive for players as it can lead to those upgrades getting rejected which means they get resubmitted and clog up the entire system, whereas reviewing properly from the start would mean a lot of good things go through first time, the rubbish would get rejected and there'd be less cries of "lazy reviewers"

  • AgentMAenlight-INGAgentMAenlight-ING Posts: 185 Ambassador

    Thanks for comments everyone.

     

    @Hosette-ING

    I have nominated and been accepted over 50 wayspots before. I know what and how nomination is good. When I submit nomination, I am taking care of photo, supporting photo, title, description, support text and location.

     

    @silverkali-ING

    Most people don’t know K-12 in my region, because of non-related K-12. But People can use the Internet to search for the meaning of unfamiliar words. If people play Pokémon GO or Ingress and participate in Niantic Wayfarer, people have internet connection. Even if reviewer doesn't know K-12, they should be able to look it up if they have questions about what K-12 is. I think it is lazy to apply incorrect reason without searching unfamiliar words.


     @BleedBoss-PGO

    In my active area, a lot of nominations are waiting for voting(reviewing). If I want my nomination to be voted quickly in my active area, I should review many nominations and gain Upgrades. Gaining Upgrades takes me or other reviewers much times, so I (of course other reviewer) don’t want to waste Upgrades. But rejection of unreasonable or incorrect reason makes gaining Upgrades reviewer frustrated. So, I conclude that this is a serious problem.

    In addition, review session provides five-star evaluation. But blanket rejecting denies five-star evaluation system. I think blanket rejecting is abuse in Niantic Wayfarer system. I never allow blanket rejection for getting Upgrades individually. I will ask reviewers for an appropriate rating.

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @AgentMAenlight-ING I get it. I've submitted (checks stats) 177 things, and reviewed over 17,000. I'm still learning and improving.

    Last year I had to send one submission (a decorative fountain) through three times before it was accepted. For each of the rejections I went through the steps I described above-- I pretended to be a reviewer and analyzed my submission critically. Both times I came away thinking, "This is pretty good but I can understand why (this thing) could be confusing reviewers. I'm going to address that and resubmit." OK, it well and truly doesn't make sense to me that a decorative fountain surrounded by a seating area and a barbecue pit would be rejected for pedestrian access, especially when the walkway was right there in the supporting photo, but I just accepted that some reviewers didn't understand and modified my submission to make it even clearer.

  • BleedBoss-PGOBleedBoss-PGO Posts: 269 ✭✭✭
    edited March 2021


    That's actually a good way of looking. My last submission was rejected for the exact same reason (And explicit activity), despite being a pedonal bridge. It actually has a different definition but there's no exact translation for it in english. Given that this zone is next to the sea, these are common hotspots and literally all of them are POI's atm, except one that's off the main path. Going through it as a reviewer, i can see where i can improve the submission clearly:


    Description: Despite the title literally including the words pedonal bridge, i have to understand that some people might not have the education to understand what Pedonal means. I should have described that a pedonal bridge is a place where people walk.


    Main Photo: Clearly, taking the photo while standing on said bridge was not clear. I will try adding a Coca-Cola can to the main picture, so that it doesn't give off the illusion that i might be flying or swimming.


    Supporting Photo: This one was also not clear. Despite showing the path that leads to the bridge (Which is a sidewalk with a road next to it), the zone was empty, and clearly no one was walking there. I'll ask assistance from the people working out next to the bridge so that they can see that people actually walk there, as not everyone can distinguish a road for a helipad or a bed of water.


    Supporting Info: This is where the explicit activity rejection reason came from. Calling this place a "place for rest and sightseeing" was the mistake. Where else can you rest and sightsee? **** clubs! The bridge also has a metal structure supporting it, which could have easily been mistaken for poles. It also didn't help that i stated that "there's an ample space in the back where people exercise". This was clearly confused with some **** innuendo about exercising in the big backspace, hence the rejection.


    Thanks @Hosette-ING! I'd never thought about looking at my own submissions from the eyes of a reviewer, but in a matter of minutes, i was able to identify why this one was rejected, and can further improve on it.


    EDIT: Not too sure why we can see who gives Insightful and Like but not who Dislikes. It's clearly a satire post, the idea is actually good on reviewing your own submissions. No wonder so many things are being rejected lately x)

    Post edited by BleedBoss-PGO on
  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BleedBoss-PGO Satire is extremely difficult in text, especially when the satire comes dangerously close to reality. I got it, but there were a couple of places in there where I was wondering. And I'm glad you found the concept useful... I have a post floating around in here titled "How to submit things that get accepted" that goes into a lot more detail about how to think about presenting submissions well. Search for the word "glossy" and you'll find it.

    As for the Disagree button, apparently Niantic learned early on in their forum experience that showing who disagrees creates big heaping piles of drama.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 694 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Hosette-ING Calling that satire is... polite. This is not the only thread they is making the same performance aka trolling. For those considering answering serioiusly, take a look at their message history. Not worth it, just in my subjective opinion of course.

  • BleedBoss-PGOBleedBoss-PGO Posts: 269 ✭✭✭


    Not a problem, i tried to make it blatantly obvious with an example of a pedonal bridge being rejected for pedestrian access, but it can be hard to tell sometimes. My bad 😅

  • BleedBoss-PGOBleedBoss-PGO Posts: 269 ✭✭✭


    I'm flattered that you actually went through my posts in order to warn Hosette of my evil schemes! I mean, how dare i AGREE that an idea that someone else posted is actually useful, right?


    I believe in reciprocity. So simply looking at my profile will not give you context as to why i respond the way i do to some topics. I've addressed serious issues in this forum. Where did that lead? Absolutely no where. And you expect me to respond seriously when others don't? Reciprocity.


    Not too sure what point you're trying to make here. Perhaps you think i'm the one incorrectly rejecting things? In case you missed it, my satire/sarcasm was on topic and outlined the problem that's being discussed. Where's your solution to that problem? :)

  • silverkali-INGsilverkali-ING Posts: 92 ✭✭✭

    Unfortunately, some people don't bother to look up unfamiliar terms or review to their biases, it's something there is no easy fix to.

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

    @Hosette-ING Can I both like and mark as insightful your post? A true masterclass of how to approach the situation, to the point that it seems your aim was completely misread. Which was actually the idea, I guess.

    Well done madam, I tip my hat (a hard hat, actually) to you.

  • AgentMAenlight-INGAgentMAenlight-ING Posts: 185 Ambassador

    Yes, certainly, some people don't do it. This is not only a problem in wayfarer, but also in human society. However, for wayfinders who discover new things(wayspots) and adventurous, I want them to look up new things and things what they don't know.

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

    9 times out of 10 if someone is complaining about incorrect rejection reasons they either don’t understand what is actually eligible or not, submit very poor nominations or more times than not just think there nomination is flawless and ignore rejection reasons as they dont think they make sense to them. Also 99% ignore the “does not meet criteria” rejection reason which is normally correct on these types of posts

  • AgentMAenlight-INGAgentMAenlight-ING Posts: 185 Ambassador
    edited March 2021

    My almost nominations are parks, post offices, community centers, etc. that clearly meet criteria. Of course, I have been careful in my nomination not to meet any of the rejection criteria. However, I have had been rejected even these my nominations.

    I started this discussion to raise the issue of reviewers choosing the incorrect reasons for rejection, assuming nominations meet criteria.

    Post edited by AgentMAenlight-ING on
  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I would never upgrade a business nomination. You want locals reviewing for those

  • AgentMAenlight-INGAgentMAenlight-ING Posts: 185 Ambassador

    I agree “presenting it well”. It is important for reviewers to understand clearly, review comfortably and improve wayspot quality, mainly description, photo, and location.

    But this discussion topic is “some reviewer chooses incorrect reason”. Incorrect reason is written in the email leads the nominator will see it and be confused. In fact, other nominators in my area have been confused by incorrect reasons. I feel frustrated from this as reviewer and nominator.

  • kubiphd-PGOkubiphd-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭

    Some reviewers just reject everything. Don't expect them to be nice. If Niantic does not do anything, they will not be punished forever.

  • flatmatt-PGOflatmatt-PGO Posts: 1,368 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Niantic really needs to set a threshold on the rejection reasons they put in emails. If 30 people reject a restaurant for "other rejection reasons" and one person misclicks and rejects it is a "live animal," in what world does it make sense to report both of these rejection reasons equally to the submitter?

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

    Niantic does tell people that upgrades put your nomination put of the local area as well. So for local business’s i find it is counter productive. I want the locals who have memories attached to the local business and know the history of the town to vote on them. Not someone who lives 8 hours away and has no clue what the restaurant/business is

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

    How big is the "local area" for a reviewer? 200 km across? If you're in a densely populated area is highly unlikely reviewers will be familiar with most of the nominations they come across.

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Every business I have submitted since upgrades were a thing has been upgraded. In fact, every submission that I have made since upgrades were a thing has been upgraded-- I review a ton and am very picky about what I submit so I'm permanently at either 9 or 10 upgrades available.

    I have not had a problem getting businesses accepted with upgrades. Only one has failed, and it was marginal although I didn't realize it when I submitted it. I thought it was an awesome quirky local oneoff ice cream parlor and later learned that it was a chain.

  • AgentMAenlight-INGAgentMAenlight-ING Posts: 185 Ambassador

    Hello,

    I read other discussion, some Wayfinder post rejection abuse such as here. So, I try to post here too. Please look out my rejection e-mail. 

    I nominated post office.

    Rejection reason (please refer to my rejection e-mail's screenshot. I translated Japanese to English.)

    • The real-world location of the nomination cannot be confirmed to exist at the submitted location.
    • Nomination is fake and does not exist at the submitted location.
    • The real-world location of the nomination appears to have explicit or inappropriate activity.

    But this post office exists and my nomination is not fake.

    Evidence


    I hope Niantic investigate this problem and abuse.

    Also, a part of reviewer use blanket rejecting for gaining Upgrades faster. That's what some Wayfinder have said in this discussion. I think blanket rejecting is abuse in Niantic Wayfarer system.  

Sign In or Register to comment.