OPR - Queue by date instead?

I'm perplexed trying to wrap my head around OPRs logistics. I play in a fairly confined area, so I am surprised that I see next to nothing locally. Instead I get the neighboring state (US) or east/west coast cities, probably their upgrades. I start to think I must be the only person nominating here, but after a few hundred reviews I'll get an edit request for my home city that teammates tell me are a year old.

Second observation: People have HUGE disparities in the nomination processing time depending on where they are. Some areas get responses in days, while others don't get them done for months, or even over a year. I can't comprehend why this is happening. And it seems it should be an easy fix.

Proposed fix 1) Figure out a wider geofencing for the approval process. e.g., if currently it's so many s2 cells adjacent to yours, change it based on national borders. Anyone in the US can review stuff here just as well as somebody in my neighboring areas, and I'm sure other areas would say the same. After figuring THAT out, sort OPR queue by date submitted, so that people get the oldest nominations first.

Proposal 2) If queue can't sort everything to review by oldest first for some reason, run an algorithm weekly that would take the oldest 5% (adjust as is reasonable) and apply upgrades like OPR reviewers earn. There's no reason to make some players wait a year for portals while others are taking a week.

Definitely curious to see thoughts or ideas related to this.

Comments

  • GearGliderGearGlider ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm sure there has to be some form of randomization at play for location and order. If the algorithm was predictable, people could make bots that went through OPR and when it recognized a pattern, just auto-rate them.

  • With the volume of nominations and potential pool, I'd think an OPR bot account would be pretty impossible to manage. If anything, widening the review pool would make it harder. Even if they prioritize old submissions, there's no telling what will come up or to whom before getting enough votes to complete.

  • iFrankmansiFrankmans ✭✭✭

    I really like proposal 2, this would be a good solution for areas with not enough reviewers.

    Maybe even allow onyx recon players to have multiple bonus locations and change them monthly or so.

  • sophielabsophielab ✭✭✭

    I've been doing OPR for awhile. I'm in the US so I get a large national pool. It was fairly obvious that before upgrades they were prioritizing submissions that were older but in certain areas. Like I get a bunch from Florida then a bunch from Texas and so on. Furthermore, I was seeing a lot of churches and park related stuff as though a keyword filter was applied to cherry pick those that should pass easily. It's less obvious now but I still see more coming from certain places for awhile. I pretty sure there still is a pool of older submissions that are not upgrades that are still being added to what we see, possibly with a keyword filter. It's just far more subtle now because it's not like 60% of what I was getting more like 15%. (Specifically, this week included an over-abdunance of Minnesota submissions most likely to replace the removed pokestop/gyms giving people in surrounding areas a chance to still play but in a nearby area instead).They have data such as how many players are using the poi's and what the actual population of the area is to make a business decision to attempt to expand further into select regions. It is unlikely that a simple FIFO would be applied. Review time is limited resource.

    I believe the reason for letting local reviewers review it first is additional local knowledge of area. Originally, we only got local but it was expanded nationally to help with backlog. That being said the boundaries of what is local is somewhat arbitrary.

    Edits do take forever. Although they improve quality and accuracy, they don't actual directly increase the bottom line. Edits are less of a priority.

  • @sophielab I get that they might not want FIFO for whatever reasons, which was why I also suggested periodic upgrade status to the oldest nominations.

  • sophielabsophielab ✭✭✭

    I know with upgrades, I'd select the stuff more likely to pass if I had a choice. I think other people have complained about upgrades choosing something they were convinced was going to pass in like a day or 2 and the upgrade was wasted. I really think allowing us a choice would of what to upgrade would have more positives than negatives. Also, letting us withdraw submissions would be great.

  • sophielabsophielab ✭✭✭

    I am actually wondering if they would ever let us just give our unused upgrades to someone. In my case, I can see some really nice stuff being submitted by a level 10 and I'm sitting on my upgrades but it would be so much nicer if we could get his stuff out earlier than sit around waiting.

  • AgentB0ssAgentB0ss ✭✭✭✭✭

    I would love them to allow us to donate upgrades to someone. I am about 2 weeks away from earning upgrades faster than I can submit. My back log is nearly done and I earn about 15-22 upgrades every 2 weeks but am only able to submit 14 every 2 weeks. If I could give them to my friend who has about a 100 deep back log that would help everyone.

  • PerringaidenPerringaiden ✭✭✭✭✭

    For a given cell, only one review can be in progress at a time. So if there are a ton of reviews for one location, each one has to be processed in turn.

  • KliffingtonKliffington ✭✭✭✭✭

    I've had reviews come back same day for the same cell/location so I'm not sure how accurate that is

  • @sophielab I did not mean to imply that my suggestion should affect OPR upgrades. It would be an entirely separate upgrade system.

    @Perringaiden the s2 cell theory only increases the benefit of clearing these ancient nominations faster.

  • sophielabsophielab ✭✭✭
    edited October 8

    The original pile of submissions was never fully cleared before reopening. The volume of bad old submissions would probably make it not a good way to get new portals. Cherry picking by keywords and targeting certain areas is a better method. They can always pull a specific poi such as gazebo and a specific state and ignore underlying portal density to shove in the national queue to expand in suburbs/small cities. Targeting things like playgrounds and parks will probably pull a lot of what those people who just leveled to 10 submitted.

    It isn't about giving someone closure on a submission. It's about getting new stuff to play with.

  • PerringaidenPerringaiden ✭✭✭✭✭

    I know that for any given area, the portal submission picked to review will be coloured by how dense the area that portal is in is, vs other portals that may be duplicates or too close. Coloured but not overriding though.

  • Cherry picking by key words just delays nominations more unique than churches and gazebos. Not everyone throws in "mural" or "sculpture" when they name things. I'm not sure why you think remaining old nominations are inherently bad.

  • sophielabsophielab ✭✭✭

    The old nominations include the original stuff into opr. I would expect more duplicates and a higher percentage of things that we've been told not submit anymore. Because reviewer time is limited, there is no perfect way to deal with it.

    I used to get the message there are no more portals to analyze frequently until the national pool and edits were added. I haven't seen it since those two were added. Also, upgrades where one can prioritize their own submission is very nice. So improvements have been made.

Sign In or Register to comment.