We are calling you Eh-mi-liii
From the far star of Wayfareee
Oh would you just come back to bring us better things to reviuuuuu
Not just things like this old gummyshoouuuu
1 Like
Alright people, NO your personal mailbox is NOT an appropriate nomination 
eMiLy we need you 
Bringing this up again as I suspect ML is being down again. Saw way more coal than usual
3 Likes
Thanks for the report @TrungLatias . We have escalated it to the team for further review.
3 Likes
I had a rejection from Emily 2 days ago, but reviewing does seem to have indeed more coal in it.
Nice spot
1 Like
As well as the two I reported yesterday/the day before, I just got a tree in review. It is possible for trees to be eligible, but this was just a normal, ordinary, not remarkable tree.
Old Chestnut Tree : One of the oldest chestnut trees in the area. Located next to a pedestrian path. Enjoyed by many especially in Autumn.
1 Like
One of the worse coal, reviewed Yesterday.
MOD Edit: Removed the images that contained identifiable information.
1 Like
Might be best to delete this, as it would contain personal face imo.
I did consider this but they uploaded it not me.
I did cover the address.
Will let staff / Ambassador make the decision.
Maybe remove the 2nd image?
Kirkwall Tesco : The one and only Tesco in Orkney located outside the centre of Kirkwall surrounded by other supermarkets
How long will it take for Niantic to acknowledge the problem that was first alerted three days ago ?
I also got that one.
That I took as just did not know the criteria and Rejected.
If eMiLy didn’t exist, Niantic would have to create it, because putting up with this garbage every day would put most reviewers off fairly quickly. They’re good for agreements, but even that quickly gets tedious .
1 Like
I don’t mind as much, because at least we get some clear decisions. Normal reviews are a lot of trail markers for me, which is fine, but the coal adds variety 
This does seem to effect wayfarers that nominate certain types more than others.
Most would agree that eMiLy does a good job of getting rid of the worse of the coal, unfortunately it does cause more work for some by rejecting some legitimate nominations.
The odd bit of coal is great for a laugh but shouldn’t be the norm.
It also seems like some nominators take eMiLy’s down time to “try it on”.
I have been reviewing for a long time, and coal is far from unusual, it’s just we no longer see much in review since the ML was introduced. It’s like going back to when I began reviewing I think
1 Like
When I first started reviewing, before eMiLy and long enough ago that I can’t remember how long ago, there were certainly coal submissions, but nothing like as many as I see now (when eMiLy is offline).
Maybe it’s the opening up to a wider pool of submitters, but something has changed over the years to make submissions worse in quality (on average) and eMiLy fairly essential to counteract this.
The effect on genuine submissions that struggle to get past eMiLy is not good, but hard to avoid.
1 Like
This one review in particular has been dealt with via report btw
1 Like
Great to know, I did report it.
1 Like