Lazy supporting statements/photos

So i've been seeing this alot, statements just stating that they want more stops, photos that are the same photo as the nomination, or my favorite 🙄..."every other one is a stop"

what do u think? tbh I often want to just reject it but unless it does not meet criteria for some reason I restrain that impulse 😒 ...but why should I have to take my time reviewing a nomination carefully under niantic standards 🤨 when a submitter is too damn lazy to tell me why it should be a stop?! 😠



  • I usually reject those unless they absolutely fit, otherwise I just roll my eyes.

  • Can you tell that it meets criteria and is in the correct location without those pieces of information? Great. Roll your eyes, ignore the **** and move on. If not then rate accordingly.

  • I can get lazy about what are obviously portals, with comments like "Art work" or "Trail head" but "More Stops" isn't a justification for a portal, and I tend to be more picky about ones which tell me in detail how they need more stops in their area etc.

  • Supporting statements are important. They should include info the reviewer may not be too clear on. Maybe some additional background history on the candidate etc. That being said, not a fan of the supporting statements where they almost appear to get defensive or telling the reviewer what to do. Saying “this SHOULD be a (pokestop)” or “come on guys it’s an easy 5*” (but it actually wasn’t because the submitter didn’t read the rules). Saw a great supporting statement once thanking the reviewers. The person explained they do reviews as well and know what it’s like.

  • HydracyanHydracyan ✭✭✭✭✭

    Most candidates dont even need this, so I don't judge if they became lazy in the obvious approval (or denies).

    But there is cases that a good support picture could help a better score to a candidate and the submitter make a cheap job like sending the same picture or doing a 180°, or something else that don't help at all, with a lame statement. When they got it denied will start crying about how bad the reviewers are.

  • I've seen similar ones, and there's one person in a nearby town who does a lot of research into his submissions; more often than not, he provides plenty of information in his Supporting Statements to back up the historical and/or cultural value of a given submission (such as links to their entries on the National Register of Historic Places).

    I honestly wish there were more people like him playing Niantic's games.

  • Tbh if the nomination is clearly visible on street view I don't necessarily make an awesome support photo. Unless it's necessary to corroborate it, it's just extra. I do however try to make a good support statement unless it's a recommended 5* like churches.

  • Lazy additional photos should be a reason to reject. get these too often and often would prevent fakes -.-

  • TheismanTheisman ✭✭✭✭✭

    Why ?

    I.e. you get a submission of a church, its a great big building, its going to be clearly visible on google and SV, what is the point of even doing a support picture ?

    People are to keen to reject for no reason

  • I'm talking about small stuff like painted power boxes. Pics get stolen like hell from everywhere around the net. If people would have to take pics from the whole environment where you can see streets, signs or other buildings together with the POI on it, people wouldn't be able to get fakes through anymore in that high amount. I see more and more people doing pics with street signs which is nice.

  • oscarc1oscarc1 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2020

    This is an example of the type of supporting photos and statements we are seeing a lot. Ignore the fact that the main photo is also bad, the supporting information gives no additional considerations to the value or worthiness of the nomination, nor does it assist with verifying the location. Honestly it's pathetic.

    If people want things to be approved, they should put in the effort for it. It would be amazing to be able to reject things for poor quality supporting info (if the primary photo and text is insufficient). That way people can learn the hard way to put in a decent effort to improce the overall quality of their nominations.

  • That's very likely somebody who is following the submission instructions literally which say take a photo of the surrounding area, with no concept of what goes on in reviewing because Niantic doesn't communicate it.

    The photo isn't great but sometimes it's hard to get an internal photo at certain times or without paying money. It doesn't matter so long as it's something to represent a valid POI. Better to have a stop than no stop.

    Look internally at how little care Niantic gives to how these photos appear in game when you click to enlarge a pokestop or even ingress portal photo if that's your thing. You're doing free work, don't make everybody put in more effort than Niantic, a multi billion dollar company, even bothers to, when it comes to photo quality. They'll never have another success on par with Pokemon and that is shrinking, it's already been 3.5 years and so many of these valid things still aren't in the game. Just help move it along as quickly as possible, there's a chance they'll be gone as a company by the time you've created your network of perfect photos which nobody will ever see and had no practical purpose. AIs are quickly reaching the point where humans will no longer be needed for this work soon, and the whole portal network might be recreated from scratch by a startup in a matter of weeks in a way nobody sees coming, like nobody thought image recognition could be done as easily as it now is, or that Google maps could map the world which they did years ago, so embrace a little nihilism about how overly pointless a lot of the standards being proudly paraded will prove to be in effect. Perhaps an angry billionaire will purge half of us with drones in a few years based on our social media likes and endless facial recognition material, don't take this game stuff too seriously and just let people have a little fun as soon as possible. My top 10 worst ways to die include still waiting for stuff to pass review in a Niantic game several years after I started trying for a playerbase which almost no longer exists.

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2020

    I had one that basically said "nothing else to say thanks for voting". It solidified a generic business rejection because they gave absolutely no more info on the submission to substantiate why their submission should be approved. It had one sentence in the description and it said school of rock for the title. Which when I looked it up it is a chain music schools that are there to teach music lessons privately. rejection reason I put was generic business with no evidence to substantiate claim.

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2020

    Honestly most of these aren't stolen art work I have seen a lot of these and the submitter is using the support photo and statement to give supporting evidence and street view usually confirms location some have painting on them others are correct location without dated streetview but it is obvious they exist.

  • They can make or break location stars if you can't find it otherwise.

  • At least this guy is being honest. As a reviewer, I'd rather see supporting statement "more pokestops" than a made-up story full of lies about the portal candidate. I hate when people are trying to trick me.

  • @Svizac28 :

    At least this guy is being honest.

    I'd prefer to be told why it should be a portal, than "My town doesn't have lots of stops" because usually when they resort to begging for stops, its because the candidate is invalid. If there's a reason it's valid they really need to include it.

  • The Pokemon submission process page for supporting information asks the submitter to tell why it would be a good pokestop. If they say they want more pokestops I can't really blame them for not being in tune with the whole Wayspots/Points of Interest/Historical/Culturally Significant thing when all they are doing is submitting to get a pokestop without further explanation. The "What makes a good pokestop" link can be totally ignored. I ignore irrelevant information in supporting text and rate with what's available without prejudice.

  • This is Niantic's fault.

    There is no detailed tutorial on how to order a good presentation, in good quality, in Pokémon Go (or Ingress).

    Such is the case, that mainly the nominations sent from Pokémon GO are very bad. For example, in addition to the complementary bad information of the type "more pokéstops are required in the area"; they are also given too generic names: "square", "playground", "church". This for an Ingress player is HORRIBLE. Nothing worse than having dozens of keys from different places with the same name, having to memorize your cover photos to be able to differentiate them.

    I reiterate that Niantic should give more importance to teaching better how to send nominations. They would avoid us a lot of problems.

Sign In or Register to comment.