Best Of

Okay, thanks for that. But… …what is the reason underpinning that conclusion?

It's fine when someone raises a nomination and everyone familiar with Wayfarer can glance at it and say: "There's no pedestrian access." or "It's on private residential property."

But when they've raised an issue and it looks like it complies with previous Niantic statements, wouldn't it be preferable to highlight something as to HOW or WHY?

It wouldn't require an essay, either. Could somebody please just state that they cannot determine if there is a safe dock available, or whatever? Under existing rules sites that are only available to an exclusive group are still eligible if they meet acceptance criteria and don't hit any of the dis-qualifiers. So this one ticks the box that says 'Unsafe'.

Why?

Is every nomination meant to be a unicorn, where you just issue some verdict that cannot be discussed, challenged, or even reflected onto any other case?

Please re-read your email as this mentions they may not appear in all Niantic games. This also means they can appear in no (current) games.

This one is in the same cell as Evangelio en la plaza so will not appear on Pokémon GO and is also within 20m of it so won’t appear on Ingress.

The second one is within 20m of Plaza Augusto Schweitzer so won’t appear on Ingress. In that cell for Pokémon GO either the aforementioned Wayspot would be the PokéStop or Emblema colgante del cuartel de bomberos but you won’t get another PokéStop in this cell.

So these two Wayspots don’t meet the inclusion rules to appear in either Pokémon GO or Ingress at this time.

Are those the actual photos you used? Because I see the both of those on Google. If you pulled them from Google, then they're Third Party Photos and that's not allowed. You need to take your own photos.

Try something like

Title: Smokey Hollow General
Description: Locally owned restaurant and general store. Products sold are based on what is available seasonally. The restaurant operates Thursday through Sunday.
Supplemental: A great place to explore and socialize. This store provides support to a very small, remote community, including people camping nearby. It is a gathering spot to catch up on local conditions and just see other people. It is the only restaurant for many kilometers around.

The location of this submission does not meet our criteria "Safe Access" and as a result, we stand by our decision to reject the Wayspot.

"SO how should i nominate a Route or Part of the route any other way then by the Massproduced sign. "

I think that could be the right question to remain all the wonderful trails and for adding new.

I think you forgot the point why this thread exist:

@Spekkje-PGO received the warning email because something changes from than (where his POIs were perfectly ok) to now (they aren't good enough anymore).

To hold users breathless waiting if they get banned, is the mean point of this discussion here.

But you're not, in fact you're doing the exact opposite.

And if you go back to what Aaron's comment was that sparked all of this, being just one of many markers along a trail is only a small part of the statement and arguably not even the most impactful part. He leads with a concrete description of what is and isn't acceptable, and that's what people will most likely latch on to. What if your local trail that is absolutely amazing for exercise has just a single marker but it has only a colored shape and an arrow? Well then sorry no wayspot for you at all.

And while i'm absolutely nowhere near the "moar pokeystops" mindset, your obsession with having very few wayspots is just not in line with what 99% of wayfarers want or think is correct. And for what purpose? I've been making satirical remarks about your type of thinking since OPR first started and thankfully the number of folks with that mindset is as small as ever but y'all sure make a lot of noise.

Update on my saga…

In the last few days, I have been given nominations to review in my municipality and surrounding areas. This is an entirely new development. So far it hasn’t moved any of nominations, but it is giving me hope that my area is no longer in a black hole.
I also filled out a wayfarer survey that asked about my experience. I assume all users received the same email. My responses highlighted the lack of attention to my nominations. The following day, I saw that one of my nominations was moved into voting with the Niantic symbol. This was a first, so I’m wondering if it was a reward for completing the survey.
One question was about the most satisfactory part of my wayfarer experience. I responded that it was the ambassadors in this forum. It was pleasing to give you the well deserved praise.
If you read all of this, thank you.

Yes… But Aarons statement was clearly against the site whats good, plus, it was related to the pure knotpoint numbers in the nederlands, plus bot problem there. MY nominations have mostly the symbol, the name of the route on the sign. clearly mass produced, sometimes even a sticker on an official traffic symbol like Bicycle way. But nontheless they are not temporary.

Anyway, i think i will try them again again and again just to meet those reviewers that just look at the criteria page.

Sure, we want some unique POIs to fill the wayfarer app, but on the other hand, we want to fill the gameboard for ALL the niantic games and have to use whatever we find if its somehow egliable. And Routes are, but are just presented by massproduced signs almost everywhere. SO how should i nominate a Route or Part of the route any other way then by the Massproduced sign. Maybe i should try to Take a pictury of the walkway to get it fetched by emily ;)

No ill will here. I just like to play on these official Trails, so i really like the markers, as the in fact encourage me to be active.