My hypothesis regarding why Wayfarer ratings can change after just a few reviews
My hypothesis on the subject is that it doesn't actually happen. It appears to happen that way because of a hidden number.
If you check your wayfarer profile and add up your accepts, rejects and duplicates and then subtract that number from your total reviews, you get a number. That number is composed of two types of reviews. Disagreements and undecideds. There is no way to differentiate them.
When a review in undecided status reaches a decision in line with other reviewers, you will see a change in one of three categories as well as an increase in upgrade %. However, if the review reaches a decision in disagreement with the reviewers decision, no changes to your numbers are visible, at least not until those disagreements reach the point of affecting your status.
So when you reviewed a few poi and then saw that your status suddenly dropped to good or poor, it's highly unlikely that those had anything to do with the change, they're just as likely to be undecided.
I don't think it's coincidental that some of the people reporting this are people with high numbers of reviews. In fact that fits, they're far more likely to have high numbers of undecided reviews. The influx of large numbers of new reviewers simply brought many of those to the decision point, and in a small amount of time because many of them probably only needed a few more votes to cross the tipping point.
In short, it isn't the reviews you just did, it's your past decisions catching up with you.
Comments
The problem with that theory is that there would need to be lots of submissions going through the system in voting and not meeting consensus and I personally don't believe that is the case.
Apart from 1 particular submission, which almost evey UK Ingress reviewer seemed to have (hello Charlotte im talking about you). No others seem to be stuck in voting, most peoples come back within 3 days of entering voting.
For it to be past decisions causing this we would need to have lots of candidates being seen by lots of reviews, all stuck in voting, and from what I have seen, that just isnt the case.
Ah but the problem with that is that you're using a localized phenomenon to extrapolate. Your area may have fast turnover but that isn't remotely true for all areas. Even someone in your area could experience this if they have home or bonus areas outside that zone or even if they just did a bunch of reviews on holiday.
I am jealous of that turnover btw, I've got a poi from six months ago that I upgraded a month ago and it still sits in voting.
Not quite, The localized area im talking about is the whole of the UK, im in a group where we have reviewers and submitters from all over the country, and none have experienced even a fraction of the delay needed for old submissions stuck in voting to be causing this
That's localized. You're talking about a relatively small region that happens to have lots of reviewers and a quick portal turnover and you're also using the experiences of a subset that belong to your group and doesn't address additional locations and reviews done while visiting.
Seriously, did you just say that the whole of the UK is a small region ?
Im not talking about one section of the UK, but the whole of it
Yeah, because compared to a global geographical game that is localized and entirely dependant on data from a small subset of that unless you can claim to have every poi submitter in that region in your group and that none of them have older submissions lingering.
The entire UK can fit inside the state of Texas with room left over, so - relatively speaking - it *is* a small region.
(Granted, it's not as small as, say, Rhode Island, but...)