Looks good now @MarkAuchincloss!
Funny, when I first tested the badge, I told @AdamGT, I’d prefer it being smaller 
2 Likes
I personally agree @WilfriedB, @MarkAuchincloss smaller is better afterall, it’s main purpose is to act as a button, a link to your HUB.
3 Likes
Adam, first off - impressive work building this scoring system (mental!).
The transparency with the audit breakdowns and the dual Movers/Shakers approach shows real thought went into this.
That said, I think there’s a fundamental imbalance in how the scoring weights percentage growth against absolute impact, and the data itself illustrates the problem quite clearly.
The Mathematical Paradox
Look at the contrast between top performers:
@Ssiddharth2000 (Level 8) leads the Master Badge list with 73 points across 10 boards. Their growth percentages are extraordinary - 1,506,890% Review Views, 32,300% Road Contributions, 1,750% Edits.
But these reflect a low starting baseline, not sustained massive contribution.
Don’t get me wrong - I appreciate he has managed to do in his first “contribution” year, what most of our top movers contributors are doing almost EVERY year and it is a HARD job! (welcoming another nutter)
Meanwhile, @jayasimha78 delivered nearly 400 million views of actual impact this year - 198M Media Views delta, 165M Photo Views delta, 32M Video Impact delta. But because those represent “only” 7-8% growth from an already enormous base, they score just 16 points total.
or @SamanthaSheehy is #1 globally in Edits with 64,547 delta - genuine, sustained, impactful (and MASSIVE EFFORT) work - yet scores only 20 points because her percentages can’t compete with newcomers.
The One-Time Advantage Problem
Here’s what troubles me: this year’s total winners largely can’t repeat.
Someone who grew Review Views by 1.5 million percent won’t do that again next year - they’ve spent their newcomer advantage.
The methodology essentially rewards a one-time phenomenon rather than sustained excellence.
We’re seeing Level 5 and 6 users with minimal total contributions ranking above consistent, high-volume contributors who genuinely shake Google Maps through sheer impact.
One lucky viral video generating thousands of percent growth somehow outweighs entire year of dedicated contribution (and real impact) from people like @Herve_Andrieu (“We’re not worthy” to mention) photo work or Samantha’s edit volume.
The Core Question
The system created currently says “growing from 1 to 1,000 is as valuable as growing from 1 million to 2 million.” But is that what we’re actually trying to measure? If the goal is recognising who made a significant impact on Maps this year, the current equal weighting between Movers and Shakers doesn’t quite capture that.
Some Possible Rebalancing Ideas
-
Weighted scoring where Mover points count 1.5x or 2x Shaker points
-
Minimum absolute thresholds before Shaker rankings count (e.g., must have 1,000+ delta to qualify)
-
Category weighting where high-impact metrics (views, engagement) carry more weight than simple counts
-
Composite scoring that multiplies rank position by absolute delta
I’m genuinely pleased with where I landed on both leaderboards, so this isn’t sour grapes - I just think some of my friends who are consistent, massive contributors aren’t getting recognition proportional to their actual Maps impact (or real shaking).
Curious what others think, and whether you have appetite for methodology refinements for 2026.
7 Likes
@AdamGT thank you so very much for your appreciation and encouragement..results like these make it all worth it and pushes us harder to keep contributing
1 Like
I kinda think you highlighted exactly what the shakers board is for, I mentioned it earlier on as a fantastic opportunity for lower level guides, albeit a one off type deal to claim the top points in that board.
Combining the boards is a tricky one, I fully understand that @abermans , I would think Adam considered this scenario.
2 Likes
Weekend Update: Final Review Deadline Set
Hi everyone,
The dialogue over the last 24 hours regarding our “Movers vs. Shakers” logic has been outstanding. To ensure that everyone—including those with busy work schedules—has the “weekend bandwidth” to dive deep into their final audits, I am extending the review period through the weekend.
The hard close-off time for feedback will be 11:59 PM UTC on Sunday, February 1, 2026.
We will officially lock and release the final Podium Results on Monday. This gives us all a final chance to appreciate the statistical nuances and the logic of “Mass vs. Velocity” for the 2025 season.
Enjoy the weekend and keep mapping!
6 Likes
Well done @Shalz. Keep guiding.
2 Likes
Hi @abermans and @Steve_UK and thank you both for these valuable perspectives. You’ve highlighted some of the most complex logic challenges we face in balancing ‘Mass’ vs. ‘Velocity.’
I am currently conducting some further statistical analysis on these points to see the broader impact on the final outcome. I propose to complete this deep dive over the weekend and will provide a detailed reply once the review period officially closes at 11:59 PM UTC on Sunday.
Thanks for helping us keep the logic as sharp as the data!
ps: Steve, please see and act on my advice here.
4 Likes
I understand your logic @abermans. I’m not a newcomer, but a lot of my stats were low, relative to the numbers of others. With notable growth on any of my numbers in the past year, the starting point in this new year is now higher, and therefore the next year of improvement will look less significant.
3 Likes
I agree.
I am not a newcomer as well and I have done well on both rankings by current method (how did I get top mover?).
Still, global annual method that has level 5 and 6 (meaning tiny activity as a whole on maps) ranked above massive contributors, seems to miss something.
Not easy to find the balance… but I trust Adam will find it.
3 Likes
@AdamGT thank you
Today I realised that it works correctly in the Google Chrome browser, but not in the Edge browser @WilfriedB. Strange enough, it does NOT work correctly on my phone, although I’m using the mobile Chrome browser on there. Perhaps @AdamGT has a further thought about this.
1 Like
Hi @AdamGT, I’ve clearly not been keeping up with your activities - Great job!
Nice to see that I have still managed to appear in 10 of the Top 100 lists for 2025.
It was interesting to see that I was just outside of the Top 10 a couple of times - maybe this year with Star Video Views 
I’m confused by ‘Video Impact’ on my results… Should this be ‘Video Views’?
Also I am only showing 8 rows when I was expecting 10?
The Brick in the Wall signature template has a broken link to the brick image.
I have just created a custom brick image. Of course you can’t add an image in the text editors for the signatures. I temporarily added the image to a post. From the preview I right-clicked and opened it in a new tab. Then I copied the address from the address bar and inserted it into the signature code.
2 Likes
Hi, thanks for sharing the preliminary results.
I’m a Local Guide and I believe I have significant contributions, but I don’t seem to have access to my HUB audit or personal results.
Could you please let me know how I can verify if my profile is included in the HUB system, or if there’s something I need to do to access my results?
Thank you!
My Local Guides username is: rodrivander
This might not be the best place to do a critical analysis of your profile, but I notice you’ve written 489 Reviews and only 103 of them are public. Also, none of them exceed the 200 character threshold for helpfulness.
Are you actually a member of the Leaderboard system? If you’re not, you’d need to join first before you can see the HUB and other details that are being discussed here.
3 Likes
Thank you very much for the response and for sharing the link 
I’ve been doing this work for several years, but I must admit that I wasn’t following the forum regularly and hadn’t fully realized the importance of actively participating in the community here.
I’m also not sure whether I had completed this registration before, so I followed your guidance and completed it now to make sure my information is correct and up to date.
From now on, I plan to follow Local Guides Connect more closely and contribute more actively, not only through the work I already do on Google Maps, but also by sharing experiences, learnings, and helping other community members whenever possible.
Thank you again for the guidance and for the opportunity to learn more about how the platform works
3 Likes
Hello @Rodrivander, regarding Tony’s correct comment:
The reason, why almost 80% of your reviews are not public, is because they were rejected by the AI filter, which not only watches for obeying the rules for Maps contributions, but also protects against suspected SPAM.
I highly recommend to read @MortenCopenhagen’s series How to Get In and Out of Trouble: The Main post
3 Likes
I’m not sure why it’s being flagged as AI, since the posts are based on real work done on site, where I’m physically present. I also don’t usually write long texts, so I’m just starting to adapt my comments and posts with this in mind from now on.
Hello @Rodrivander,
Google never tells us, why exactly a contribution was rejected, but the more hidden contributions you have, the more rigid the filter becomes. Remember, almost 80% of your reviews are currently hidden, as @tony_b discovered (probably before your profile was hidden).
The filter checks the text of your reviews and the contents of all attached photos and video. If only one is rejected, the entire review including all other media will be hidden.
Some other local guides or moderators might be able to give you some advice, by looking at your contributions, but for now, you did hide your profile:
Again, I suggest to to read @MortenCopenhagen’s series How to Get In and Out of Trouble: The Main post or many other topics here on Connect related to hidden reviews or photo.
2 Likes
Tôi thực sự không biết phải diễn tả cảm xúc của mình như thế nào. Tôi vừa tự hào vừa hãnh diện, xen lẫn chút xấu hổ, khi nhận ra mình có mặt trong cả hai bảng xếp hạng và chưa hoàn thành mục tiêu review 2025 như dự định. Tôi xin bày tỏ lòng biết ơn sâu sắc và sự cảm kích chân thành đến @AdamGT vì sự nỗ lực không ngừng nghỉ và đã tạo nên động lực để tôi tham gia, rồi vỡ òa trong niềm vui khi được góp mặt. Như chúng ta đều biết, việc chia sẻ giá trị cho người khác mang lại hạnh phúc cho chính chúng ta, và kết quả này chắc chắn sẽ là nguồn động lực to lớn để tôi tập trung cao độ hơn vào việc review. Một lần nữa, tôi xin bày tỏ lòng biết ơn và trân trọng.
1 Like