Wayfarer Cooldown
New Wayfarer site has a very short "Cooldown" and it keeps me blocking, but i'm correctly analyzing candidates in the same manner i did in OPR.
Please make this cooldown bigger because is very annonying for valid users to validade candidates.
Btw, my rating is high so maybe it should be longer for verified reviewers?
2


Comments
its broken. They won't fix it or don't know that they turned the wrong switch. I have gotten 3 in 24 hours it is a joke. No precanned responses either. Get rid of it or tweak it to get the real offenders quit slapping your people who vote honest! Niantic come on!
I am getting cooldowns for reviewing edits. I am trying to make it as slow as possible, but in most cases it's just a spelling check. Edits should be counted differently timewise.
I have good personal experience in using a sports timer on my phone, making sure I use no less than 20 seconds on anything, even simple spelling edits. Works fine for me!
I've never got a cooldown, even though my reviews often only take 10-15 seconds (obvious ones, such as playgrounds).
Captchas seem to pop up only when I make a mistake. Such as accidentally rating a sports field high, when it actually was on school grounds. Which was likely something that other reviewers noticed.
So I presume that the system looks at how the other users have rated the wayspots. And if your ratings are too different (either too strict, or too lenient), the system slaps you for that.
Sorry no, all the questions and cooldowns are about speed. If you rate crazy, your "Wayfarer rating" may go down.
I've been hit by a captcha after letting the nomination sit for ten minutes. The cooldown message also contradics the 'it is all about speed' theory: it warns against falling into voting patterns and using pre-canned answers, but says nothing about voting too quickly.
Evaluate each POI by its own merits, and keep in mind that the visual uniqueness category is for how common something is in the area, instead of how common it is nationwide. If you're rating all playgrounds the same, you've fallen into voting patterns.
I suspect that the 'Historic/Cultural Significance' and 'Visually Unique' categories are the ones that throw off a lot of reviewers. I try to keep an average of 3* in those. POIs that warrant 1* in both cultural and visual should usually be rejected, as they do not fit the criteria for a wayspot.
I agree with this. Also I have a theory that if you're rating controversial candidates that should be approved like playgrounds, pools, pergolas, sports fields, etc low in the visual/historical catagories but still 4-5* in the other catagories then you average your overall approval score lower so when the agents who think they should be rejected and 1* reject or give very low stars across the board it will tank the submission and lead to a rejection.
Pink Elephant Statue was SOLELY about how a title could vary and how to rate varying titles... Show me where it says OTHERWISE.
Remember that pier that everyone 1-star the title/discription because it demanded that reviewers must approve it? Yes, 1-star on the title/description is still a rejection.
What I am saying is you consistently make up your own rules. You read a questions SPECIFICALLY about rating titles and twisted the answer to fit what you wanted.
I know we've been over this, Yes people can rate the portal as a whole then the title, culture, and visual separately. However, If the overall portal is 1* it should be 1* and marked with a reject reason. Yes you can mark something as a 5* overall and give it a 1* in visual or 1* in culture. That doesnt change if something so bad is submitted it should be marked as 1* overall.
Even if you give it a 5-star rating overall, if you mark a 1-star for title/description, safe access, or accuracy, it still counts as a reject instead of accept. We are still unsure of how much weight culture/historic and uniqueness has, but there is evidence that the former does count as a reject if there are too many reviewers give it a 1-star.
I was saying as example lets say its a older looking Playground.
5* Overall
5* Title
3* Cultural
1* Visual
5* Access
5* Location
This overall is an accept.
Things have been rejected for not being culturally important (see some of the reject reasons given in mails)
So yes, a low score in any aspect can lead to a reject
Titles and descriptions are required to be accurate, be about the object, contain no markup, contain no emojis, contain no name of players, contain no links, and not mention any aspect of Niantic's games. If they fail any of these requirements, then 1-star for the title/description field and it gets counted as a reject.
People submit Historical markers all of the time, yet agents approve them.
NOWHERE does it say not to submit historical markers, it says edits of historical markers (title and description) will not be accepted.
People reject descriptions because they don't realize it is not required.
People mark down the title/description if it contains things unrelated to the Waypoint (as explained by Krug's answer in the AMA)
People reject titles because they don't realize it is not required.
Titles are required
People expect perfection with spelling, when Niantic says that it can be edited after. If its a valid portal with a spelling error you are supposed to approve.
Again, as explained by Krug in the AMA, you rate it lower
People submit Historical markers all of the time, yet agents approve them.
Most historical makers are information boards, which are explicit stated as acceptable. Are you suggesting they should be rejected instead? The only cases where I may reject a historical marker is if it does not have safe pedestrian access. In those cases, I rate the nomination normally, but give it a 1-star for safe access.
People reject descriptions because they don't realize it is not required.
Descriptions not required means that if a submitter does not include a description, then it does not affect the overall rating or the rating for Title/Description. But if a submitter includes a description, then it must pertain to the object that is being nominated and meet all the other requirements mentioned above.
People reject titles because they don't realize it is not required.
Not only are titles required, but they should reflect what the object is, either by an official name or a description. If you submit a pink elephant, but title it "Green Giraffe" instead, then that is grounds to 1-star the title/description rating.
People expect perfection with spelling, when Niantic says that it can be edited after. If its a valid portal with a spelling error you are supposed to approve.
While I understand that some reviewers do take a star off for misspellings, I don't know of anyone who 1-star a title/description over a misspelling or advocates doing such. So this is a strawman arguement.
I have received rejections for both historical and visual. So they do matter as they likely bring your overall score down.
I'm baffled by this. Can anyone show emails with rejections reasons for 'Historic/Cultural Significance' or 'Visually Unique'? because let's be honest, 90% of the accepted nominations these days are very low on this scale on one or both of these scales.