Opr Malicious
Why not punish those who violate the Opr rules? Requests that meet the criteria are rejected just because it is the opponent's demand. Why can't this be avoided?
5
Why not punish those who violate the Opr rules? Requests that meet the criteria are rejected just because it is the opponent's demand. Why can't this be avoided?
Comments
There are many reasons why a submission may be denied.
It's not because you are submitting a valid object, that the submission is valid.
Both factions are needed to review a submission.
There is no evidence that faction bias in OPR exists or even matters.
You can argue that there is no evidence, but we can see it. Why is a place of worship that meets the criteria not approved when requested with the right picture, correct explanation? How can a mosque be demanded 7 times and rejected each time?
Have you got copies of the submission pictures, emails, rejection emails etc ?
Another factor could be if the portal candidate can be verified as being at the chosen location. Sometimes there is no photosphere, so it certainly helps to add one.
There's also regional approvals and denials, meaning that the actual locals know and believe POI is unique, historic whereas someone viewing it who is from a different state, county, country, province just sees an uninteresting submission photo that through the photo shows nothing of interest.
I'm talking about the mosque. The requests in question; Mosque, park or sculpture. This is not a regional situation.
I'll ask again, have you got copies of the rejection emails, the submission details, the submission pictures, etc
Plenty of times I've had to reject an otherwise 5 star candidate because of something in the photo, e.g. somebody's face or a car license plate. On a few occasions mismatched location because the pin was waaaaaay off and I couldn't find the correct location. On a few occasions because of emoji in the title or references to portals or stops/gyms in the description.
The candidate may be valid but the submission may not.
This is totally hypothetical, but these may have been portals in the past. When PokeGO came out many organizations, communities and others did request a removal of portals because they did not want large groups of people intruding on their area. It seems once those portals are removed, it's difficult to bring them back because they are in the system as "do not submit list". If you know your submissions meet the requirements, then post a repeal in the portal appeals section.
The sad part is that I know some players that just reject everything because the get their bade faster and it quicker. The real problem is that you are only rewarded for consensus whether it just or unjust. The problem is that it's hard to prove whether it was just or unjust.