oof - i meant to add this link, too - ty
It has links at the end of the post to some of the discussions I was referencing. Some people were not convinced that “community” pools applied to apartment communities. But imo, it should!
2 Likes
Hey @basherballgod & welcome !!
This is an issue I have also raised over the last couple of months. So far it has not been addressed by the company. The newer guidelines specifically make accommodation complex pools eligible. Unfortunately, they are not being accepted by ML or reviewers . It would be good if someone at the company could fix this up or at the very least comment.
Your submissions are all fine and should have been accepted. In my case, I have had the same treatment although mine have subsequently been quickly approved on appeal. I have only submitted a few then avoided…
The other problem is that of rating. As I busily reviewed and voted positively for such swimming pools I thought I was doing the games a free service. Then my rating dropped as my fellow reviewers were not voting to accept. Consequently the agreement ratio drops and so does your rating. This situation has stopped me from doing as many reviews and I haven’t bothered nominating either.
It is totally frustrating that these POIs were singled out for affirmative action and have since been abandoned.
Please can someone with authority at the company make a decision and take action?
One problem has become two. Eligibility criteria not being followed. Ratings, therefore, being affected.
2 Likes
There are still people out there that don’t think apartment pools should be allowed, even after the May clarification. I had someone say they still reject apartment pools last week, if I remember.
I have to remind people that the apartment is a community, albeit a smaller one within a larger community, so the pools there do qualify as “community pools.”
2 Likes
Have to get my plug in here - hope it helps. It is my most watched video.
2 Likes
I’m glad to see I’m not the only one running around and nominating all the pools. XD
Keep up the good work. Don’t be discouraged by a few anomalous decisions. Posting about it here was the correct move, and it should also help Emily and appeals if there’s some kind of coding bug or something.
I don’t think you need to remind people that apartment complexes are communities. That seems a little condescending, no offense. It’s probably better to point them to the newer wayfarer guidance, since before, they were explicitly not eligible. Probably more a matter of bringing people up to date.
If they still reject pools after that, then well, I guess that’s their opinion. It doesn’t follow guidance, but I find that a lot of nominations and review decisions don’t follow the general guidance so what are you gonna do?
I really wish that the appeals team could send at least an email advising people of the criteria for an improperly rejected nomination, and start penalizing them if they keep improperly rejecting things. I think I’m at 58 successful appeals at this point, and I’ve got a long list of more things to appeal; but I think there should be something done to address repeat offenders that encourages them to follow the criteria.
So how am I being condescending and everyone else explaining this isn’t?
Staff has advised us to post about bad appeal decisions here in the forums. This allows staff to take another look, and they may reverse the decision. I say “may,” as a reversal isn’t guaranteed.
I’d assume that staff does inform the appeals team or the member that rejected the appeal that it does meet criteria. Again, just an assumption, from similar past work experiences, but I think they also noted they’d make sure a reminder was given, or even extra training, if need be.
There is a difference between explaining something objectively and saying you have to keep reminding people of something, as though you know and they don’t.
Perhaps you don’t mean it that way…. Communication thought online platforms lacks context so can be taken differently than intended.
I don’t think the person I replied to was upset at all for all the explanations they got. That’s who I meant to reply to, but somehow replied to Pooh instead. Mistakes happen…
Never mind
Oh I meant I have about 58 successful appeals, also that I wished they’d at least send something to the reviewers if they improperly rejected something that was successfully appealed; especially when they’re consistently rejecting things improperly that are getting overturned on appeal.
Not all communities still see apartment pools are acceptable, so it’s hard to say if all reviewers are being told that they are reviewing them incorrectly. Not all reviewers visit the help section or help center, are here in the forums, or even on other social media sites looking at and reviewing criteria.
Typically, if there is any abusive reviewing detected, then something may be sent out. However, like I noted, not all see these pools as eligible now, and still follow old criteria.
I think pool supporting info should just be “Great place to socialize and exercise”. (Those things are in the review flow, and you want 
on them.)
Add info about the specific place meeting criteria, if you can. Examples: they have a swim team, there’s a Friday night DJ, it’s listed on an apartment website as having an awesome pool, the pool is artistically shaped - something.
Trying to educate reviewers can be off-putting to human reviewers. And it means nothing to AI. I don’t think it does your nomination any favors.
It’s possible that the couple rejections are at places that requested Niantic put a geoblock on their location. Meaning: they had one or more wayspots in the past, and players misbehaved, and they asked for them to be removed. This salts the earth so nothing else can grow there, even ten years later.
Most of the ones I’m appealing are pretty much your basic should be 5 star things. I tried to do a quick tally: 7 sculptures, 3 fountains, 14 sports fields/pools, 9 murals, 10 pavilions/pergolas, a dog park, 2 regular parks, a community center, a playground, a 10 commandments, 2 unique architectures, 2 picnic areas, & 5 historically important things. Then I have a pile of pretty much all that kind of stuff that I’m waiting to appeal; which may take me a year or two to work through at this rate if I do an appeal every time it refreshes.
FWIW, I wouldn’t reject it for this reason, but with how ML focuses on reviews it might be a reason…
You’re nominating 2 separately eligible things. A pool encourages socializing, exercise, and is an important part of culture. A grill & patio area encourages socializing and is similarly but differently eligible. It may feel like a bit of a double dip, but they are different enough that I would focus on one or the other rather than trying to combine them into one.
5 Likes
Sometimes it’s helpful to think of the description section as an opportunity to describe how something meets the criteria; and highlight every box it checks.
That’s a good and concise description.
We don’t have pools like this in the U.K. so I don’t submit/review pools but I would be very happy to read something like this.
1 Like