That is not documented anywhere in the support site, right?
No.You can read about abuse ladder system here. What you receive is nothing like it.
Donât think you understood what Iâm trying to say here.
There is no mention of this kind of emails - like the one I got - on that page, correct? That page is linked from the email. What youâre saying and what Aaron said is that the email is worthless, as it doesnât impact the account.
They should, at least, update their documentation to inform users about it.
I am on the heat but I think I would agree with this one.
Educational email feel unclear, and if I am in the recieving end, I might ended up just not bother doing Wayfarer anymore.
Educational email should be more clear and have a better wording imo.
3 Likes
Its not worthless. If you keep doing spammy description, i think you will got into abuse ladder warning sooner or later.
1 Like
No no I think you are misunderstood me.
If I am a wayfinder who does not really join Forum, and I got this kind of warning. I would be having 2 reaction:
- I posted in forum, asked why I got this warning, without knowing why is this submission got violated.
Or - âŚi just not doing Wayfarer anymore because they tell me my submission is generic or low quality.
There have been a lot of ban fearing in social media about Wayfarer, and if I got the email like that, telling âyour submission is low quality but we wont tell you whyâ, I would just abandon Wayfarer because I am scared if I post another submission i might get banned.
1 Like
A one random word that means nothing, that looks someone added a placeholder (and missed the enough time to edit [citation required]) is an abuse? Impressive.
People dont show the whole truth in social media. People repeatedly shown in forum saying they got incorrectly banned until staff come and correct it
It does not generate, but like, if you are a new Wayfarer, are you really know the 1-day warning pop up exist?
Unless you actually got warned before / or active in forum enough to see the warning first hand, most people reaction will treat this as âHey, your submission is not fit or on bar quality, but we wont tell you why.â and probably just stop.
And I agree! Social media cause fear, there are always the other side of the story, but it would be nice, if the wording of the educational email can be more clear on why is this submission violating, or reword how abuse work.
This forum itself is a social media platform.
Leaving aside that Niantic said you had a longer window than this, 7 minutes is plenty.
When I use Upload Later, I batch upload them while sitting at my computer. After they start coming through, every minute, I refresh the submissions page and put everything on hold that is in the queue.
Even this doesnât guarantee that one wonât get past me, but itâs very reliable. If one does get past, I accept it as a cost of using this method, which saves me a lot of time in the field.
When you are submitting a nomination, the final step of the process is to confirm all of the information provided is correct⌠gibberish text is not correct. There is nothing on the submission process and criteria that states you can used gibberish text as placeholder to edit later. But there is criteria against irrelevant text.
bookmarked this for future discussions - ty
Happy to hear this outcome and hope it can be applied (situationally, of course) for other cases. Weâve certainly seen more complaints about abuse messaging lately and seen them overturned which is very good but also concerning, but perhaps a topic for a different day.
Of course! Nice to see this, and similarly thereâs no excuse for gibberish to be accepted, perhaps thatâs why ML accepting was turned off. And I thoroughly agree with the sentiment shared elsewhere about using (what I refer to as) âminimal acceptable relevant textâ and that the submitter confirms their nomination details are accurate before hitting âSubmit.â
Nevertheless,
I donât know the details, nor should I.
I donât see information on the Help site about how long we have, but itâs a well noted and experienced phenomenon where we have somewhere between 20-24 hours after making a submission to when it can be 1) rejected by ML 2) move into community voting or of course 3) sit and languish for another few days or weeks, even when upgraded.
Itâs also widely noticed that when a submission is made using the âupgrade laterâ method, when released from the gaming app you sometimes lose that â20-24 hourâ period - and thereâs been a lot of community complaints about losing that time because theyâre used to having the opportunity to further edit. (I think Iâll also add - in the past, @NianticThibs had told me placing nominations on hold had a negative affect on how my nomination moved through ML and community voting!)
I donât think itâs fair to call out community information when there is a lack of Help Site information for this experience. We all have expectations on how the system works based on lived experience, and itâs difficult to keep track of all the nuances that arenât explained by the system and have lived negative outcomes, including potential abuse messaging.
Canât say the above necessarily applies to this scenario, but there is a real frustration with how this queue time works, especially with âsubmit later,â so much so that it was a topic in the recent AMA.
Thanks!