Curious/Need to know how declined (unable to verify) contributions impact future submissions

  • 2
  • Question
  • Updated 1 month ago
  • Answered
  • (Edited)
Below are three declined contributions that total 93 submissions that were subsequently implemented (two by contact us, one via GS). I don't know much of how approval %age impacts submissions, which is why I'm asking the question. It's confusing as to why all 3 contributions were rejected by "unable to verify" when all 3 were verifiable with the info submitted and/or on their face.

So am I negatively impacted by these rejects that should have been accepted in the first place?

Part of the reason I'm asking is that there are additional fixes related to these and why should I submit them only to be rejected, impacted negatively, even if then they are then subsequently implemented.

Without knowing why these were rejected beyond the "unable to verify" it's pretty hard to understand.





Photo of MikeTheWhistle

MikeTheWhistle

  • 736 Posts
  • 976 Reply Likes

Posted 1 month ago

  • 2
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3787 Posts
  • 4752 Reply Likes
Hi MikeTheWhistle,

Unfortunately I cannot reveal too many details about our internal systems but rest assured that these submissions have not negatively impacted your standing. In these 3 cases the mistake was on our behalf, but we appreciate that our rejection reasons can be unclear at times, but also cannot cover every basis why an item is rejected.

I hope this helps to explain the situation.

Thanks,
Will
Photo of MikeTheWhistle

MikeTheWhistle

  • 736 Posts
  • 976 Reply Likes
Will,
Thx for the info and I understand the need to keep some things close to the vest.
Can I just ask if what you're saying is that if one has a declination that is subsequently approved via review that it goes into the plus column in effect? That wouldn't be sharing anything that should need to be kept confidential.

Part of the reason for me asking is whether these categorical declinations are used to make biz decisions, then it's GIGO (garbage in-garbage out) b/c these reasons areĀ  simply non-nonsensical.
(Edited)