Will anything be done regarding clearly fake rejection reasons?
As expected, now that we get to see the reasons chosen why our submissions were rejected, we are faced, usually first and foremost with legitimate opinions of fellow agents' opinion on a submission that are often quite valid and applicable. If you wing it, you'll generally be caught and you'll be told why.
However, mixed among them - and sometimes fully in the forefront - there are nearly always completely senseless reasons that simply could not have been chosen by anyone but an abuser. Old statues, huge murals that were there for years marked (visibly) as "seasonal displays", graffiti dedicated to a cult local singer, the town's symbol almost, marked bizarrely as a "generic store or restaurant" (nope, there's no way to mistake that for such a thing in that case)... crisp, crystal clear photos without "mistakes", marked as "bad or lower quality photos".. Sometimes the "reasons" are so ludicrous it's funny. The list goes on.
Now we get to clearly see abuse in its full glory, maybe / likely / perhaps not directed at particular users or factions, but just abuse, perhaps to quickly get a medal. But what should be done with that? NIA is clear, no complaints allowed, just resubmit the portal - but, while understandable, doesn't that just enable to abuse? Should there perhaps be a system in place where somehow (intentionally) senseless rejections are punished?
How would you go about it... and would you go about it at all?
Comments
Didn't read it all, well, maybe a line past the title..
We don't know how Nia are using the rejection reasons, we don't know if it's working as intended.
I'd bet, it's not functioning as they wanted.
That aside, whichever one you had rejected, that prompted this post, if you care to, share the details of the submission, see what opinions you get from people who may not have reviewed it.
This was asked twice in the last AMA. Now we wait.
@LemoMcLemonFace While your advice is sound I haven't gotten that many Prime submissions reviewed yet that I should ask the general public's opinion about (endless queue where I'm at now). For those I did get asnwers for I'm generally aware of why they would be rejected and the reasons's usually stated correctly. It's, however, the completely senseless reasons mixed among the legitimate potential reasons that caused me to post this - highly obviously permanent stuff marked as seasonal, very much non-business related stuff marked as generic business etc.
This was asked in the AMAs so hopefully we get an answer but I also don't think you need to post your rejections to get reviewed. I think we all know that people are mismarking rejections. I'd guess the major reason is because they're too lazy to fill out the required field in the "doesn't meet criteria" rejection.
I'd expect, the stated reason (s) in a rejection email to be the overall selected reason the reviewer selected, or contributed towards based on 'star' selections.
The only reason I suggest posting / sharing an example of a rejection, is to get a wider opion.
Otherwise, you're essentially making noise, to a community that may or may jot know you, with nothing to support your comments.
Seem to be getting a lot of rejections for things not being culturally or historically significant. For example commissioned murals are cool pieces of art and visually unique but not necessarily culturally or historically significant. A submission should not need to meet all those criteria to be approved, just one of them.
However parks, churches and post offices being rejected as a generic business is just lazy reviewing.
Reminder:
5* = Awesome! Absolutely
3* = average/boring
1* = Hell no! Reject!
If you 1* ANY category for a POI you feel should be a portal, that does help lead to a rejection
Once POGO reviewers get in, nothing will be rejected, so this isn't an issue :-P
No, it is:
5 - Accept
3 - I don't know
1 - Reject
How do you apply that to Cultural/Historical significance of a plastic playground?
I usually 1-star that category for most playgrounds and sport fields.
That would be why people are starting to get rejections of parks and playgrounds on cultural/historical reasons.
(Not my portal but raised today)
I had generally been giving stuff like that low ratings on cultural/historical significance until I saw those rejections. I’ve been giving better ratings since!
Without seeing examples of some of the rejected churches, we can't know if perhaps there is a daily children's nursery, which Nia stated in the past is a reject.
I admit to using a single reject reason before the emails started including them (now I religiously pick the reasons). I imagine if i had continued to do this, I would receive a cooldown. I believe this would filter out some "poor rejecters".
Many people are annoyed by the fact there isn't a 'Mass production' rejection reason to click, so many people decided for themself they click generic business instaid. Perhaps it's time Niantic just adds this rubric.
For Historical/Cultural rating, I also treat it as "How much use/enjoyment does the community get from this?"
So sports fields and playgrounds, which get a lot A LOT of use from the community usually end up as a 3-4 star rating for me,
I received today a mail that said my portal was a private residence. I nominated this place already 15 times, and everytime i did in the description i wrote it was inhabitated from 1620 to 1730. In january 1998 it became a protected monument... i once added a link with the official declaration of its status as protected monument(before i knew links were a big no to accepance)
Edit: nobody lived there since 1730. Theres no water or electricity inside.
For each of the subcategories, I would a minimum of 2 stars unless I was a 1 star rejection overall. For boring sports fields they've been a 2 star because it is clearly say a baseball field so I will not mistake it for a dog poop station but is it field 1 of 3, 2 of 3 or 3 of 3 that isn't clear they all look the same. Now if it has a sign with a name that's higher. The overall score for sports fields was 4 but individual subcategories always at least 2. I was always under the impression that 1 star in any category could lead to reject so I didn't ever want to do that to someone. It does sound like it needs minimum score now.
I would rather have conformation from @RedSoloCup or anyone else on Niantic's POI team on this before changing my standard 5-5-1-1 voting on playgrounds, sports fields/courts, and trail markers.
I was just most concerned about 1 subcategory with 1 star leading to rejection. That's what I'd really like to know. Does a 1 star in the subcategory lead to rejection?
For baseball fields, at least, I tend to rate them at least 3/4 stars for "Historic/Cultural Importance", 5 stars if they're named for a historical figure (local or national).
Why? Two reasons:
First, because baseball is a fairly popular sport worldwide (maybe not the *most* popular, but it's still in the top ten).
And second, it's colloquially known as "America's Pastime" (yes, I'm American).
It can.
Just got a rejection of a pedestrian bridge and the reason was "appears to be a natural feature and was not man-made".
My supporting photo had a waterfall in it showing what the surrounding area was. The title was "small falls pedestrian bridge".
Not sure how that could have gone wrong.
At this point I'm ready for the Pokemon reviewers. Bring them on.
What makes the bridge portal worthy?
I had a boat launch portal candidate rejected for three reasons:
I couldn't help but laugh. Some people shouldn't be reviewing.
I just had a playground rejected, as a generic business.
Apartment complex playground, no businesses anywhere near it. So yes, that reason is clearly being abused.
Well, if there's 19 of them, you're going to start losing points on uniqueness, and if it's a picnic pavilion and not an actual gazebo as I suspect, it's probably lose points on name as well.