Random irrelevant commentary on Ingress Portal descriptions

Need a consensus on this. As a reviewer, for the last three months I have come across an agent somewhere in rural New South Wales is always puts "google maps outdated" in the description of the portal. I rate these badly since it shouldn't be in the portal description, and it seems other agents who review the portal share the sentiment.

The poor agent's heart is getting crushed because they're wondering why their portals aren't going through. To be honest, I can often check on more updated maps in the country's website and verify their existence, but the description doesn't cut it for me. So they're just going after rejection after rejection until they can slip one in (which is a bit rare).

Is it possible to give feedback on these portals? As to not include "google maps outdated" or to place the location marker on the actual portal and not the middle of the road? Education is key, and I really think the comments used on my rating decision if they're constructive should be communicated to the agent anonymously.



  • ChamaleonXChamaleonX ✭✭
    edited July 2019

    I suppose that Niantic does not accept the feedback because it deduces that its rules are sufficient to understand what type of description you should put in each portal request. If you do not follow the rules, all portals sent with an irrelevant description can be rejected.

    The agent is responsible for following or not following the rules for the description of portal shipments. Therefore, if you are rejected every time for not following the rules, you do not need feedback.

    If on the road it says "Maximum speed 50 KM" and you go to 100 KM and you have an accident, you do not need feedback to remember that you have done wrong. You are paying the consequences of doing things wrong. Likewise, the rejection of your portal requests is the consequence of something you have done wrong.

  • TheismanTheisman ✭✭✭✭✭

    The rejection email does not tell you why something has been rejected, it only gives a vague outline of possible reasons

    For example

    I have no idea why that was rejected

    Meets criteria as per AMA

    Location was correctly

    Safe access

    Title is correct

    Picture is fine

    Yet it was rejected, and the rejection feedback is non existent so im left wondering why.

    NIA have already stated they are aware that the rejection email isnt as helpful as it could be and are looking into improvements for it, so the OP asking for better feedback is a valid request.

    @mysteri0n do you know who the agent concerned is and can give them feedback directly or maybe point them towards an OPR chat , im in a cross fraction one on TG myself for agents throughout the UK and while we dont all agree on everything , everyone is welcome to voice their own opinion, ask for help etc (the link is https://t.me/joinchat/HE6k_xN0A7dLAESvwq7Rgw if anyone wants to join )

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭✭

    @Theisman you probably got slammed with poor quality photo due to you not zooming on the sign and having all of the surrounding objects in the photo. Time and time again in my area I feel that is how some of the agents in my area vote they think it isn't visually appealing and 1*.

  • HaramDingoHaramDingo ✭✭✭

    I was really hoping that for the Prime round of submissions that they would be able to have more details on why a portal was rejected, but they still only include common rejection reasons. No idea who the agent is since they're quite far up north NSW but it would be nice to tell them not to include "google maps outdated" in each of their submissions, or at least put it in the supporting statement instead.

    Our area has a dedicated Discord channel to pretty much put an opinion on everything, and most of the time we wouldn't submit what we don't agree on. Then I suppose I'll be looking forward to see what Niantic has in store for the future of OPR, especially if PoGo submissions are coming front, right and centre.

  • ChamaleonXChamaleonX ✭✭
    edited July 2019

    @Theisman Even if the rejection email does not have all the necessary details, this does not indicate that the system's feedback is necessary or valid. In this case, what is important is to expand the list of causes of rejection in OPR, so that players who send portal requests know in advance all possible causes of rejection. If you do not understand why your portal has been rejected, that happens because you have not found the reason in the list of causes. We can add the reason in the list, without the need to apply direct feedback.

    With respect to your portal, I would reject it for having a bad quality photo. That, plus it does not seem to be something really attractive or interesting. You should improve the quality of your photos. That may help you in the approval.

    Including comments on the rejection decision does not seem fundamental to me.

  • TheismanTheisman ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ChamaleonX the main problem with the current rejection email is that it doesn't give any relevant information on rejection, just vague suggestions.

    One solution would be If a submission is getting 1* by reviews and ends up being rejected, Niantic must have the data for the number and type of 1* rejections, and instead of sending a generic "catch all" email they could send one emailbased on the highest 1* rejection for that submission i.e.

    Your submission has been rejected with the main reason being location mismatch

    Or ( in the OP case)

    Your submission had been rejected with the main reason being Title / Description

    Obviously it would be worded better than those examples, but it could still be a standard template email, just one for each of the 1* options, with a little paragraph at the bottom to give advice to each one , which in the OP example could say, dont forget titles and descriptions can not have game related names, URL, emoticons and not contain any unreveleant details to the submission or names of other companies of products.

    As to my own rejection, i could explain why you would be wrong in the rejection choices you have said you would have made, but that is not relevant to this thread as I was only using that as an example of the current template and frustration in lack of information it contains.

  • ChamaleonXChamaleonX ✭✭
    edited July 2019

    @Theisman Ok, I understand your point of view. But as I understood the beginning of this conversation, it refers to the possibility that OPR analysts can make anonymous feedback. This conversation does not talk about whether you should improve the system of notifications by mail.

    I have said that feedback comments in OPR are not necessary if there is a list of reasons for rejection more complete. In that sense, I think it's better to expand the list of reasons for rejection and have more options to click on when rejecting a portal. This way when a portal sent by you is rejected you should review the list of reasons to know the details. You can easily deduce that, without needing to receive an anonymous feedback.

    Anyway, I have received emails with additional information about the reason for rejection. Apparently, NIA usually adds additional messages, but not always.


    Take a clear photo: the easier it is to see what you’re submitting (i.e., a photo taken during the day at a reasonable distance and that gives an idea for the scale and placement), the easier it can be evaluated. In addition, a low-quality photo (e.g., pitch black/blurry photos or photos taken from a car) may cause a candidate that otherwise meets the Portal criteria to be rejected.

    It is likely that your portal has a very interesting story. Maybe those papers are historical. But the photo is still of poor quality. If that portal were in my city I would review the description to analyze if it really is relevant and to compensate for the poor quality of the photo.

  • grendelwulfgrendelwulf ✭✭✭✭✭

    That's a 1* portal. That's why it was rejected. I mean, it looks like a trailhead map kiosk whish is 3 or 4* at best but it isn't the same. It's just a billboard for lost cats and sale furniture.

  • TheismanTheisman ✭✭✭✭✭

    Ok if you're going to continue to discuss my rejection, this is why you are wrong.

    1) The picture submitted does not fall into low quality photo rejection, you have the description of a low quality picture in your attached image. The picture is neither blury to dark or taken from a car and you can clearly see its a noticeboard.

    You may not like the picture, but it doesn't fall under low quality 1* reject. As you can tell what it is then if you did not like the picture you should have still accepted it as per guidelines which say to accept pictures of valid candidates as a new picture can always be added.

    2) its a noticeboard, these are valid candidates, there would be no reason to view the description as we have been told to accept noticeboards. You may not find it an interesting candidate but you should still accept it as per guidelines.

    My own feeling (based on talking with other reviewers) is that a lot of reviewers do not like noticeboards and instantly 1* as a candidate as they find them boring. This is despite being told they should accept them.

    As to my comments regarding a possible change to the email, if you check a few posts up you will see where the OP was also unhappy with the current generic response, and the issue of possible changes was raised there, hence my inclusion of the suggestion in my response to yourself

  • ChamaleonXChamaleonX ✭✭
    edited July 2019

    @Theisman I do not agree with you in the two points that you indicate. But if you want to believe that your candidate is acceptable, it seems respectable. Although the fact indicates that something has not worked with your portal.

    With regard to anonymous comments I still think that they are not necessary, It seems better to create a more detailed list where you can look at the reasons for rejection. So, if you have a rejected portal you do not need anonymous comments. You only need to look at the list of reasons for rejection so that you understand what you did wrong.

    Remeber that is the subject of this conversation.

  • TheismanTheisman ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ChamaleonX , your first paragraph unfortunately sums up some OPR reviewers all to well, people who have guidelines to follow yet fail to do so and are rejecting valid candidates due to either their own personal opinions or lack of knowledge.

    What i have stated in my previous post regarding pictures and notice boards are facts, and covered in the guidelines, the fact that you choose not to accept them means you are happy in rejecting a perfectly valid candidate, based soley on your own personal opinion and doing so against what you have been told to do by Niantic.

    As to your second paragraph, like I have previously stated, the conversation has evolved when the OP mentioned email responses, why not try and continue with the evolution of the conversation instead of just solely saying, you dont think anonymous feed back is appropriate.

  • ChamaleonXChamaleonX ✭✭
    edited July 2019

    @Theisman The OPR system is rich in opinions and arguments. You must learn to accept all the nuances derived from the initial guidelines indicated by NIA. You seem to be angry about having a rejected portal. If the portal has been rejected there is a reason. If you want to create an argument to cancel the rejection, do it. OPR will give its final opinion on this.

    With respect to the anonymous comments I have already explained previously why I do not think they are necessary. You can read my previous answers.

    If you want to discuss the usefulness of the NIA notification mail, respect this conversation and open a new conversation for that particular topic. I think they are the rules of courtesy in this forum and in the rest of the social forums.

  • I don't have an issue with the fact that it is a community noticeboard or that there are other things in the picture. In my opinion, the issue is probably that it IS a low quality picture as the whole left side is blurry and so out of focus that I can't read the first couple of words at the top of the board, even when I blow the picture up bigger. I would suggest you take a picture where you can actually read the title at the top of the picture and try resubmitting. This is meant to be helpful feedback as to why the portal was rejected, not a criticism of the portal candidate itself.

  • HaramDingoHaramDingo ✭✭✭

    Jesus Christ, Please respect the post and don't go off-topic with such ferocity.

    In other news, there's an agent somewhere down south of Sydney who signs off every portal with the letters "DS", like what on earth are they trying to do to put their initials on submissions? They would be approved, but only if those letters weren't there. I hope Niantic will improve the process soon, but the disambiguous rejection emails are not helpful.

    But yes, if the noticeboard didn't have much of a glare from the sun, I'd reckon it'd get in.

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭✭

    Only thing you can do is use all of the other information given to make a judgement. i posted a similar topic a week or so asking do we need clarification on abuse of the support photo and people using the text box to beg for a portal. It frustrates me to have people taking photos from the vehicle and the main portal pic is zoomed in to hide it was taken from the vehicle but the support photo shows the agent in a vehicle with the dash and passenger side door in the picture. Unfortunately just grade these types of submissions like you would a redacted submission.

  • 0X00FF000X00FF00 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Part of the problem here is, as you stated, it's valid "as per AMA".

    MOST of the working OPR reviewers passed their test and never looked back. They don't browse here or reddit, they don't participate in or read the AMAs. Any such new information is, to them, non-existent.

    This is on Niantic to (somehow) fix. Players asked those questions in the AMAs because they were confused, or some instructions had multiple possible interpretations. One of the biggest such arguments that went on the longest is finally settled, but is STILL generating new questions: that teeny **** of land in front of PRP. (tl;dr: not allowed, world-wide, full stop)

    All the OPR-related AMAs and any such other similar information and clarifications needs to be collated and attached to the OPR website, at minimum. A popup notification reminding users when something new appears that they haven't read yet would help wonders, because as HPWU has shown us, people reeeeally hate having a little red dot that never stops reminding them.

  • Agreed wholeheartedly. If the submitter could get my reject reason I'd take the time to write one. Probably safer, however, to just send the reject category chosen. I hate to think what sort of nasty comments you might get in divided communities where people know who is submitting and use the field to include an insult. But even knowing that the reject reasons given included "Photo quality" or "Generic business" or "location mismatch" would go a long way towards helping submitters improve their candidate quality.

  • Actually I think it would also be interesting and perhaps useful to know the average rating. Your portal got 2.5 for location accuracy and 4.2 for visually unique" for instance, then people who constantly submit with all lower cases might notice that their submissions keep getting low marks for title accuracy, etc.

Sign In or Register to comment.