Does this count as influencer reviews

I agree with @cyndiepooh that this looks more intentional to include this person. That begs the question why were they included?

I am very care even with supporting photos that seem to include extraneous objects. These may be included as a signal to a group that this should be accepted.

Interestingly, I would reject that one because of the person.

about that notice board tho

i think to reject it beacouse like the notice board changes no so does it count as permanent?

Iā€™m curious: Is the pool of reviewers small enough so that happens on a regular basis?

I know a player around here that has taken to including his dog in his photos. But Iā€™ve never reviewed one of his submissions.

The content changes, but not the existence of the board.

However, as is, I would reject because its definitely not interesting in its current configuration. There is one around here in a similar state that Iā€™ve purposely not submitted.

Or worse. shudder

Early days of OPR flashbacks start

3 Likes

Is this in direct reply to the board in this post?

The reply feature may be muddling things and I just want to be sure.

I donā€™t think Iā€™d give a direct answer based on the example given. I have no issue approving a notice board that is empty (as you said, ā€œThe content changes, but not the existence of the boardā€) - thatā€™s the one thing that remains permanent. However, I would want to look at the support photo a little more closely or the area it is at. In my own region, notice boards usually have awnings or protective plastic/glass covers to keep the content dry I understand that isnā€™t true everywhere, but Iā€™ve also seen privacy fences or such paneling installed to block unsightly infrastructure. So, I think Iā€™d want to make sure that this isnā€™t just a partial fence of some kind.

I donā€™t think thatā€™s too critical and Iā€™m not asking for a notoriety to verify. Just want to be a little cautious since posted fliers are what I usually use as evidence of intended community use.

Edit to add: And also verify who/what ā€œKarmiaā€ is to make sure somebody isnā€™t slipping in a personal or player name unrelated to the candidate.

1 Like

Iā€™ve had ā€œsubmitter Identifiableā€ content locally where somebody included their child in every photo. To be honest, at this point I forget if it was main photo or support photo, but it does happen. The content was otherwise (a bit lazy but) acceptable, but I continued to reject until they stopped using those photos. I also remember a dog in some and seen shared publicly hats, bikes, selfies, etc. Iā€™ll also admit Iā€™m not always consistent - in part it will depend on the overall nomination.

3 Likes

If the supporting photo has people obviously associated with the submitter, pets, bikes, cars or any other item belonging to the submitter then it should be rejected IMO. Of course, reflections can also be a cause for rejection. It seems harsh, but if you are doing it accidentally then itā€™s something youā€™ll learn real quick.

1 Like

oh lol karmia is the name of the kibbutz/city

1 Like

I would not approve it. It all looks propped. The person in the wheelchair and the folded up picture or maybe poster. Also you can tell that is a home. Iā€™m sorry not trying to be rude in anyway, but I would reject this. I have many more reasons.