Come back eMiLy, we miss you!

General Discussion
141

When we speak about trash nominations, this is literally bad graffiti on the side of a trash dumpster. Unclear if this is something that the ML model would be able to pick up, but this city has a ton of absolute trash nominations (the most humorous of which, to me, was fabricating stories of Britney Spears growing up there, demonstrably false) and it’s likely overdue that this person (or persons) received a Wayfarer ban.

image
image1287×463 189 KB

It is demoralizing to login to do reviews and see this sort of nomination exist.

1 Like
142

I’d think ML would be able to pick this up. It’s clearly a trash dumpster, and it’s not even in the supporting photo, so it might not even be in this location.

It also looks somewhat s3xual and explicit in nature, so it could get flagged for that by ML as well.

1 Like
143

I want to remember AGAIN to stop sharing low quality submissions!
Please find a better way to express your frustations.
Thanks

4 Likes
144

Can you (or any other ambassador) please explain why, when the nominations are not being mocked, we cannot discuss the coal that is being submitted.

4 Likes
145

Most of the coal that could be just someone getting the criteria wrong is not shared here. These are the worse of the worse.

As the nominators will just get a generic reason on the email they are unlikely to learn.

What would be wrong if they did see them here. At least they may realise how bad they are and maybe change there ways.

2 Likes
146

I would love to be able to provide some feedback to the submitters to explain why their genuine attempts have been rejected. Some pre-phrased explanations that you could pick from would solve the problem of having to filter free-text messages.

For the coal that is blatantly abusive, there is no feedback that would help, because the submitter knows what they are doing. Even if the submitter saw a thread about their submission, they couldn’t take genuine offence. For example, the fake book library above.

Some coal is less abusive, but still so hopelessly wrong that it’s hard to know if there is any help.

8 Likes
147

You can describe what you’ve had in review exactly like the OP did, without sharing screenshots of full submissions.
We want to give the impression of a helpful and welcoming community. Where everyone who found us feel comfortable to talk about their struggles and share experiences.
We don’t know which reasons are behind those submissions. Some may think CHEATING! others will think “oh if I only could make comment to help them” but there’s no value in blaming someone in a worldwide forum.

5 Likes
148

Seeing several posts today that ML is back. Some “automated process” rejections were even for nominations that had been in community review.

1 Like
149

I reviewed the garbage collection shed both yesterday morning and this morning. eMiLy shouldn’t be back yet.

1 Like
150

I had that rejected it…

The whole thread is getting on ball now highlighting what people nominating

The question of rewards should be statues in each village honouring us the poor reviewers for the the pap we have to pour over

The question should be is why? Bitterness. Angry. Entering anything because they can. Clutching at straws. Want a nom outside the home? they see rubbish in game and think OK? Competition with friends?

Maybe we can suggest niantic have a chat. And say look not a great nomination. We would be really interested in knowing why you thought to nominate. Not that people will not lie.

But I am interested. Why?

The ability to just nominate just because you reach a certain level. Does not help. With the rebalancing of levels in PGO maybe shove that up from what ever low figure it is now. But more importantly better onboarding and ongoing training on what makes a good nomination and a good review.

And maybe a system that says hey. X percent is getting rejected + X percent marked for attention get stopped from nominating for x time and then when allowed back restrict it until prove better qual nominations. I dunno easier said than done. But maybe there is an algorithm for that???

I mean they using street corners to test putting noms in game so hey why on earth would people not try and nominate anything if you see stuff like that…You see rubbish you nominate rubbish..

As for joy in other peoples nominations. Or abusing people because we ask questions. Don’t think that is quite fair.

Some could say some reviewers are being abused by the peope who get away with getting submissions like this in the system. It goes both ways.

Sure we could ask things a different way but the sentiment is really am I right to reject this. Why am i seeing this? What are the right reasons to reject it?

Personally - When I see other peoples raising reviews they had an issue with and it is the same as one I had or similar it really helps in keeping on the ball. Yup I am on track - others seeing the same as me and have a similar view. That is a good thing

It also offers up possibilities of people - on seeing this conversation- and going here are some suggestions to improve (there will be a lot of groaning at seeing many of the old suggestions coming up again). BUT again - provoking this conversation is a good thing.

What I see here is - a great deal of frustration of people going - what is going on… but I go to my early point. Until we understand why - all the reasons then - you can never 100% fix it. And that will mean frustrations on all sides

But then once eMiLy is back we will be happier.. BUT will the underlying issue have been resolved. ? SO many questions :wink:

1 Like
151

But what I want to know is - did your dreams come alive?

152

ML is definitely working now - three rejections received, but also an acceptance (email says “our team”) within 1 hour 11 mins of submission! This particular nomination had been rejected twice previously by the community. When did ML start accepting nominations again?

image
image565×721 125 KB

153

Curiously, the rejections from “our team” in the email refer to “Reviewers” on the contributions entry, with a specific rejection reason not referred to in the email:

image
image565×695 129 KB

154

That wasn’t necessarily accepted by the ML system. If it goes into internal review and is then accepted by Niantic, it will say “our team”.

2 Likes
155

OK, I had two appeals and four nominations in the system and they were still pending earlier on and then all determined within the space of 11 minutes. Surely they wouldn’t all have been sent to internal review? I’ve only been aware of two of my nominations being determined by internal review in the past and they were determined in hours / days not a few minutes.

156

It’s possible that ML is accepting submissions. I feel we need to see if anyone else has this happening, as one example isn’t sufficient to make that judgement.

157

I am getting alot of approvals within one day recently, but the Email always says Reviewers, so I can’t say for sure.

It depends if they have changed the Email or not.

158

It’s definitely behaving differently to before. Previously, it wouldn’t make any decision until around 22 hours after submission regardless of what time of day they were submitted, so that if still pending after 24 hours post-submission I could be confident it would be looked at by reviewers.

This looks more like it is now operating within a certain timeframe where it sweeps up anything submitted since it’s previous sweep. If this is correct, it is presently unclear if these sweeps are occuring once a day or more frequently.

159

I put through another eight nominations and in the 24 hour period following their submission only one has been rejected by ML and this time the rejection says “This submission was declined by Niantic’s automated process for not adhering to Wayfarer criteria”.

It seems you were correct that all of the nominations decided on Monday were dealt with by internal review. The explanation for this must have been that I had two appeals submitted, so as well as deciding those, the internal review muct have chosen to look at the four other nominations that were “In Queue” at the same time.