Changing the end time with short notice in the middle of UK night isn’t fair as it means those of us who were asleep and therefore couldn’t do a last minute rush to finish. I had found areas where I was getting an almost constant stream of edits and nominations to review (and actually I still am this morning, I went straight back to reviewing and only went to check what was wrong when I went to check my number on the banner and it was missing!) and had allocated time this morning to get up to 500 (I had reached 330 before giving into my husband who wanted me to turn my phone off and go to sleep last night - if I had known that it was going to end when it did then I would have either refused and continued reviewing in bed, or gone elsewhere to continue reviewing!). It would have been different if more notice had been given of an early end, but I think it’s exceedingly unfair to only give apparently 2.5 hours notice when that is going to be in the middle of the night for some people.
I wasn’t able to review at the beginning of the challenge due to Easter services and other things going on, but I was able to find some time with going back to work this week. If it had ended at the planned time and I hadn’t completed sufficient reviews due to none coming through, then I would feel that was my planning. But changing it when actually I am still getting lots of reviews isn’t fair
Hi Tintino, it was borderline impossible to get the 400 nominations due to the slow speeds. I think I did a little less than 300 and I was trying to do it every day for several hours. I feel as if lowering it by only 100 wasnt enough due to the technical difficulties combined with it ending early. I dont know what position you have with Niantic, but could you consider lowering the requirements even further, or suggest it to whoever makes these choices? I understand that probably wont happen, but I’m just giving my feedback.
It was possible, but only if you could do early reviews when the challenge started (i almost got lucky if it hadn’t been for that 24h cooldown for skipping a single review). Others probably had insider information from discord/friends or hit a jackpot from finding a spammed/botted city. I tried the “hard day’s work” like you and ended up with the same issues. Multiple hours every day, lots of errors, lots of completed backlogs and eventually capped off at 290 before getting slapped with the early termination. And i even had access to forum threads where ambassadors (thanks) were sharing locations with backlogs. I believe almost everyone that tried to do it the hard way without special guidance or luck ended up getting rugpulled out of their medals and rewards.
One of my nominations is still in que as well, and its a tennis court that I used a boost on. Tennis courts always get approved pretty fast, especially when I use a boost.
Is it really an issue to have to validate in areas with different languages ?
That’s what we do already for challenges in exotic countries.
And that’s what we do here in Belgium with the existing radius, since we are < 100km from FR and NL, and 200km from DE, LU or UK. We already check propositions in 4 different languages.
I personnally would be happy to validate proposals in a radius of 1000km or more.
There are tools to translate when needed.
(PS very disapointed to see this morning that the challenge ended during the night)
Anyone going above a tier should be entitled for the next. That would be a fair compensation.
Changing the rules out of nowhere, and without a warning is shady…
To me this seems like the most reasonable suggestion. If you play with arbitrary numbers you’re always going to have a people that fall a few short and will be angry. Just upgrade the tiers and that’s that. It’s also much harder for someone to argue that they would jump 2 tiers during 24 hours. Whereas jumping one would be entirely reasonable and expected.
In my honest opinion, this is not the first time they have conducted wayfarer challenges. If it’s their first time doing this, the community might be able to close an eye but they had this challenges a few times so they should know what are the possible expected issues (Not enough nominations/ Slowness in website)
Measures can be done to allow more people to be able to complete the challenge for the rewards while also improve performance for everyone.
Imagine taking an examination paper where you decide to take a bathroom break, only to be cut of time on a sudden notice. You know you are able to pass the exams but due to the sudden cut of time, you were given the fail grade because of the time cut. Would it be unfair for failing the exams due to an error from the administration?
I picked a random number. There will always be people who are just a few below any threshold that’ll be set. But having ended on 39 myself you can imagine I’m very disappointed. Not to mention the hell it was going through 39 with an average speed of 1 every 15 minutes or so
