How Reviews, Attendance and XP Connect on ILWIR

A sports booking, attendance confirmation and a review are three related but different actions. Understanding the distinction helps players earn the credit they actually qualify for and helps hosts avoid false “validated” session claims.

Joining a session is not proof of playing

A player can join a roster, pay a fee and still miss the game. Joining reserves or requests a place; it is not a verified attendance event by itself. Attendance credit must come from qualifying evidence of actual participation, not from the existence of a booking.

A host should keep the published session details accurate so players understand when and where to attend. A good event description also explains any QR check-in period and the possibility of leaving a review after the game.

QR attendance and review confirmation

A QR check-in is one source of attendance evidence. ILWIR also supports a joined non-host participant submitting a member review after an ended session to confirm their attendance. That review is a different form of evidence; it should not be written into the record as a QR scan that never occurred.

The review route is intended for someone who genuinely joined and played. An unrelated visitor, a guest and the host cannot manufacture a qualifying player attendance record with a review.

What does +40 XP mean?

An eligible review-attested attendance event can grant 40 attendance XP. The normal review reward is a separate reward under the applicable review rules. A review must not be rewarded twice for the same attendance event, and QR + review must not create two game-attendance counts for the same player and session.

Attendance leaderboards should count a unique qualifying player/session attendance, not every button tap. If someone edits a review or moderation changes its status, the system must reconcile the reward instead of adding a new copy.

When is a session validated?

For an ended, non-cancelled game, one genuine non-host player attendance signal can validate the session. A host's own review or QR self-scan is not enough. Review-confirmed attendance is only appropriate for a legitimate roster member and a qualifying submitted review.

Hosts should treat validation as an audit signal, not an invitation to solicit dishonest reviews. If someone did not attend, they should not submit a review claiming they did.

How to write useful post-match feedback

Describe aspects you experienced personally: whether the timing matched the listing, how clearly teams were organized, whether substitutions were fair and whether the session atmosphere was respectful. Avoid posting another person's phone number, private payment details, allegations without evidence or made-up scores.

A helpful review can be short. For example: “Arrived at the listed time; the host explained rotations and we played several short games.” Only use that wording if it is true of the specific session you attended.

What if the credit does not show?

First verify you reviewed the correct ended session using the joined account. Look at the current attendance and leaderboard view after the refresh interval. If it is still missing, contact support with the public session link and your account identity through the private support process; do not publish payment screenshots or private IDs in public comments.

Do not repeatedly resubmit a review to try to multiply the reward. A correctly implemented system deduplicates the claim.

The host's follow-up checklist

After play, review the actual participant roster, invite genuine feedback and resolve disputed payments separately. Link useful public recaps only when they contain public and verified session facts. The 11v11 host checklist has broader event-closing guidance, and the RSVP policy guide explains why booked capacity is not attendance.

Editorial note, November 2026: Feature availability depends on the production release and current account/session eligibility. This guide does not promise credit to hosts, guests, absent players or unverified activity.