Guide Needs Updating to include ALL AMA and ALL 1* Reviews should require comments

First off and Foremost. I am not claiming this is the most amazing portal submission in the world. However, it is a community noticeboard and its used often by the community so it fits based on the previous AMA about noticeboards.

Its been rejected 3 times and VASTLY varying responses. This overall leads me to believe most people are just selecting 1* responses that don't require a comment. At least if all 1* responses required a comment we might get more relevant feedback.


This is a community noticeboard above the community mail boxes protected from the weather by a little hut.

Very visible from the satellite view.

There is even a Photopshere: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2823335,-81.016872,3a,75y,92.92h,90.98t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipOrUvqIPQjciAYqcMYSzteXBeRw6AIeZFnZ15CS!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipOrUvqIPQjciAYqcMYSzteXBeRw6AIeZFnZ15CS%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya350.75323-ro0-fo100!7i8704!8i4352


And here are the 3 rejections I have received:


This is not intended to be a rant, but I believe the more posts we put about legitimate problems the better. This is intended to discuss abuse of the 1* responses used and that the guide needs a full rewrite to INCLUDE all still relevant AMA responses. Currently only Octobers AMA responses have been included in the guide.

«1

Comments

  • AgentB0ssAgentB0ss ✭✭✭✭✭

    Going to tag @0X00FF00 because he loves stuff like this.

  • GendgiGendgi ✭✭✭

    @AgentB0ss I respect you are trying to nominate it as a "community noticeboard" and I know you want the discussion focused on better feedback on why portals do not get approved, but when I see your photo, all I see is a post box structure, which is ineligible. It's in a driveway, which while it may be safely walk-able, doesn't meet "sidewalk" criteria.

    Anyways, I completely agree with your intent. Better feedback is necessary, both for myself to learn where my nomination went wrong and to others to encourage better nominations.

  • OchemistOchemist ✭✭✭
    edited December 2019

    when I see your photo, all I see is a post box structure, which is ineligible. 

    For what it's worth, this was my initial impression, too, and if a reviewer didn't spend the time to look more closely (a different issue!), the irrelevant title or description rejection would be appropriate.

    (I don't see the walkability as an issue; clearly it's safely accessible if the community mailboxes are there.)

  • AgentB0ssAgentB0ss ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2019

    Okay so lets do this. Where does it anywhere SAY a sidewalk is required? There is plenty of grass around it to make it safely accessible to anyone wanting to walk to it, as seen in the satellite view.

    A driveway? This is not a driveway. its a mailbox hut off a street with some parking next to it.

    The Noticeboard is clearly visible above the mailboxes, I would get a closer shot but it didn't make sense for context. Also remember not everything looks the same or is presented the same, because this is above mailboxes doesn't make it any less a community noticeboard.

    Also sure lets discuss sidewalks, there is a sidewalk that goes within 10 feet of the object as seen below.


    Edit; Just to put that sidewalk into more context, thats the edge of the sidewalk seen in the satellite view.


  • GendgiGendgi ✭✭✭

    @AgentB0ss the screenshot of the satellite may not be clear enough for me to tell. The red path you marked shows a sidewalk up to the end of where cars are parked. The exact wording used when giving a 1* for location is:

    Use for nominations that do not have a safe, pedestrian pathway leading to the object. Note that it is not sufficient to be able to access the nomination from a nearby sidewalk. There must be a pedestrian walkway or a trail leading all the way to the object. ...

    Maybe I'm not seeing the sidewalk connects up there. Based on the satellite, it looks more like it's a pull off area, and the boxes are car accessible and not necessary by sidewalk. Apologies if that's not the case, but that's what it looks like.

    Honestly, try nominating the board without the mailboxes in view if possible. It's like nominating a mural but the picture is of a building making the mural look post-stamp sized.

  • GendgiGendgi ✭✭✭

    @Ochemist disregarding whether or not this mailbox is safely accessible, just because something is intended for use doesn't make it safely accessible. There is a gazebo literally in the middle of a nearby town's busiest intersection (small town, but still). There are no marked cross walks or crossing signs. The city encourages its use and children play on it regularly. Looking at it, in person, is the literal definition of "unsafe pedestrian access" and the gazebo has been hit several times by cars.

    Anyways, I have to review for safe access per whether or not there is clear safe pedestrian access, not just "if mailboxes are there, it's safe." There are mailboxes on the side of my street that I wouldn't consider to have "safe pedestrian access," either.

  • ZaltysZaltys ✭✭✭
    edited December 2019

    I concur. The rejection system needs work.

    For instance, I nominated a wooden trail bridge (valid as per the update log), which was rejected as both 'generic business' and 'natural feature'.

    And I just had a community center for handicapped rejected as 'generic business' and 'private property'. Generic business is harder to dispute, but does this look like single-family home to anyone?:

    Twenty parking spaces, which were also clearly visible in the photosphere. Not to mention dozen lounge chairs, several benches, and two picnic tables in the same scene. I can only presume that whoever picked 'private residential' was either trolling, or picking randomly.

  • AgentB0ssAgentB0ss ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2019

    The grass alone would be "Safe" pedestrian access thats my point. If its not safe to walk on grass than I don't know what is safe.


    Just for clarity from the photosphere, looks like a safe walk to me,


  • 0X00FF000X00FF00 ✭✭✭✭

    January 2019

    "Q25: Nick Schollar - In the UK we have "Community Notice Boards" in residential areas, often maintained by the parish or district council or the residents' association. I think these make good portals but that's a heavily debated topic on the OPR chat and about half the notice boards I submit get approved. Does NIA think these are eligible to become portals?"

    "A25: They do hold the function of being community gathering places. But like many things, it is likely to be very situational. They should follow the same guidelines as the Little Free Libraries. "

    @NianticCasey This is the sort of thing that we know because of AMAs, but is not updated into the Wayfarer site. And so many things are being needlessly rejected. A kind soul has collated most of these into a google docs:

    an alternative is here but all of my web browsers parse it very very slowly:

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W0FUKoW2oV9g80ZWWQfBJqohAT3PloYeG1K3Rnblizw/edit#

  • So you are arguing that a framed corkboard in a post box hut should be a wayspot? This is a weak candidate and I could easily justify using temporary/seasonal display for the reject reason. It's a frigging $4 corkboard!

  • AgentB0ssAgentB0ss ✭✭✭✭✭

    Per the AMA Community Noticeboards are eligible. Also if you look, you can clearly see the ware and tare on the actual board. Its clearly been there for a long time and is used often based on what can be seen. Its a permanent fixture.

  • Based that AMA, I wouldn't outright reject it, but I certainly would not give it high ratings. I find that your posts are reasonable and I agree with a lot of what you advocate, but aren't there better quality wayspots you can submit because I certainly wouldn't be prepared to die on this hill?

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭✭

    I do agree we need an up to date reconciliation of the OPR, AMA, and wayfarer guide. I had mentioned 1* should be required to have an input to niantic so it was just randomized or the accidental picking the wrong category due site lag.

  • GearGliderGearGlider ✭✭✭✭✭

    I agree with you on most things @AgentB0ss, and I’m sorry you’re experience difficulty with this nomination, but I’m going to play devil’s advocate for a bit even if I don’t agree with everything I say.


    While community notice boards are great and eligible candidates, there can be a difference between a good Community Notice Board and a kind of generic cork board. Community Notice Boards usually have a sign saying so, or backing from a municipal organzation like a park, government building, or library.


    Many smallish cork boards in apartment complexes or or HOA communities might just be for random lost and found, or misplaced mail. Certainly not a big draw or distinctive for a community.


    And while Apartment Complex and similar areas are valid location criteria, there are still semi-public areas within that are iffy, and would cause concern for strangers to spend there for an extended period of time. In your photo, it appears to be in a closed off space with everyone’s personal mail boxes, and few flyers that appear to be personally home printed. This certainly weights against the idea of it being for a wider community.


    Without an obvious display or title on the board, about its usage, many reviewers may be unsure or worried about rating it for what the title and description claims it to be. You may want to get a closer photo displaying that it is indeed a public community board for the community and not just for personal matters. Or find a link to a website or a photo of a memo or map that explains that this is indeed for the wider community. And if it keeps getting rejected and it is causing you frustration, you may just want to give up on it for a while. Not only do reviews tend to rate the same object lowers if they see it too often in a row (assuming it was rejected the first pass), but there are better candidate you could tend to.


    Overall, I would try the phrase “Community Bulletin”. Bulletin sound so much more official and commanding. I’ve had good success with it. However, with how your submissions looks, it could be a grandiose term and people might assume you’re fudging/lying about it.

  • ZaltysZaltys ✭✭✭
    edited December 2019

    Like the OP says, this is about the inaccurate rejection reasons. Not about whether the nomination was valid, that's irrelevant to the topic.

    Regardless of the validity, a corkboard is clearly not a 'generic store' and should not be marked as such.

  • KliffingtonKliffington ✭✭✭✭✭

    The problem is, that agent is clearly not alone. There's a lot of people rejecting things or giving advice across forums to reject things for pedestrian access when it doesn't make sense. Don't get them started if they think something is gated! 1* pedestrian access.

  • GearGliderGearGlider ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2019

    God I remember on the G+ days, when someone who got in the red and asked for advice, everyone would just say “you need to reject more!” Some one came on to reddit bragging about a 93% agreement rate and someone even commented “if you rejected more you could get that to 100%!” It was awful and dark times.

    I still know someone who says they won’t rate higher than 3-stars if they think an area has enough portals.

  • KliffingtonKliffington ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm seeing that "if there's too many things I won't rate highly" response from PoGo people too. That's why I think we are just in the same situation as before just a little off from normal. We have an influx of new people who are wildly misunderstanding/making up rules for themselves and a lot who stubbornly refuse to take anything on this forum into account since PoGo players are being locked out of the conversation and we are just Gatekeeping A-holes.

    Niantic can help rebalance things by taking and implementing feedback but even if they don't I feel like it will stabilize itself eventually.

  • TheFarixTheFarix ✭✭✭✭✭

    Can you cite the specific AMA? Because I have my doubts that these would be classified under the same category as educational signboards.

  • AgentB0ssAgentB0ss ✭✭✭✭✭

    @TheFarix yes the one that @0X00FF00 is the exact one I mentioned. Not an educational sign but a community bulletin/noticeboard.


    @GearGlider Thanks for the words man. Bulletin does sound far better.

  • This is so true. Going by number of nominators alone, you could say AMAs (about portals) lost much if not all of their value when Wayfarer launched: Everything needs to be centralized and online. Btw. the "Acceptance criteria update log" is current as of October.

  • KliffingtonKliffington ✭✭✭✭✭

    And most people still don't know that it's something they should check

  • It would be a start; people actually quoting/linking to a live, official source.

  • LOL his is a mailbox hut. This a 1*

  • After reading and catching up in the thread the issue of pedestrian access is ridiculous. A sidewalk leading all the way up is NOT required. Just pedestrians being able to walk all the way up safely is required. Not everything has a paved path, sometimes it's just grass you walk through to get to it. BUT even if you want to be a stickler on a sidewalk accessing it his primary photo for the nomination shows the sidewalk. Just look at the giant red arrow if you can't find it.

    We all know Niantic's new feature to give rejection reasons is very new and just mean to help point you in the right direction. They're not something worth arguing with. If they obviously don't actually apply, then ignore them. Maybe add a little extra info in your supporting info addressing those issues when you re-submit.

    That said, If you want to submit it as just the community notice board, which I'd agree with, then just submit the community notice board, don't put the mailboxes in the photo. Your photo can easily be the context photo showing that it's inside the mailbox hut, but the primary photo should be the community notice board.


Sign In or Register to comment.