Making Rejection Statements Mandatory

Right now one of the biggest complaints I see discussed here and on reddit is that rejection reasons are nonsensical. The biggest issue is when generic store is selected for things that are not stores, but there are all sorts of examples of rejection reasons that don't match the nominations. One of the reasons that discussion participants believe this happens is that the real reason is "does not meet criteria" and this rejection reason requires a reviewer to type in an explanation of why the candidate does not meet the criteria. If all rejection reasons required the reviewer to explain why, do you think we would get the actual rejection reason instead of bogus reasons that do not require an explanation?


  • FuzzySunFuzzySun ✭✭✭
    edited January 2020


    Well, maybe. There would still be the people trying to spend less than a second per review - they'll probably hit whatever the top one is no matter what.

  • TheFarixTheFarix ✭✭✭✭✭

    It would be better to remove the requirement to type something in when "Doesn't meet criteria" is selected. The text doesn't get sent to the nominator anyways, so why force the reviewer to further explain?

  • GearGliderGearGlider ✭✭✭✭✭

    It’s to help Niantic better understand the reasoning for that reviewer’s rejection if they later want to take a look at it more closely. Taking that away would give Niantic way less insight.

    Plus if ‘doesnt Meet criteria’ didn’t have a forced statement like the rest, the lazier reviewers would just choose that for every rejection and submitters would get less feedback about why they Portal was rejected.

  • I would like for there to be a comment and for people to be able to report junk reviews. Some of the portals I have submitted have been rejected with totally invalid reasons. I'd be happier if they said "Photo isn't exciting enough" or whatever.....

  • HydracyanHydracyan ✭✭✭✭✭

    Maybe just sending better candidates resolve this problem.

  • Taking less than 20 seconds per review is a fast track to a 4 hour cooldown. You can hit cooldown in fewer than 20 reviews if they're all under that time threshold.

  • GearGliderGearGlider ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yes, you should have to provide some reason as to why you are rejecting it. Whether it be a typed comment or from a list of options, but having a "I don't like this with no reason" option is what we had before reject reasons, and portals always took much longer to review before that, with way more rejections of eligible candidates.

  • This is what I wanted to say. No point if writing explanation if the submitter will not see it.

  • HydracyanHydracyan ✭✭✭✭✭

    If the submitter won't see, it's useless. I doubt Nia Ops will see either, it goes to trash.

    But also, if the submitter don't care in make a good picture with good description and supporting data, why the reviewers should care about giving it a good reason to rejected?

  • Why would they not show us this?

    The standing explanation is that given a full detailed report on your results, would allow people to better understand how to collude and reveal more of the system than they want.

    Imaging if you had the results for all reviewers in your region for the last 6 months. You could derive a lot of information out of it.

Sign In or Register to comment.