Best Of
Re: Trailmarkers - warning received
That's frustrating and disheartening for you.
Meanwhile I can go on a 20 minute walk and interact with 15 memorial benches to John Smith, husband, father etc etc
Some that existed before Wayfarer, some after it started, some have had the small metal plaque that you can buy from the local council from anywhere between a couple of hundred quid to >1k removed, some will have it removed in a year or two.
Re: LDS and Niantic Games
Would anyone like to buy a t-shirt that says
"I visited The Church Of Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints and all I got was two revives and a pokeball"
Re: Removal of inaccessible gyms
That's perfectly valid and wouldn't be removed. The only way it would be removed is if the owners complained about it. For the purposes of the game and the wayfarer database in general it's a perfectly valid wayspot. Limited access locations are fine so long as some people have access some of the time.
Re: Why a wayspot with less like, Is now a Gym?
Photo thumbs-up are meant to indicate that you think it's the best picture for the database.
Niantic bast ardized that for a while, counting thumbs to determine gyms. (I think they only meant to use thumbs for the initial PokémonGO load , and forgot to take out that code.)
Now it's back to just meaning you like the picture. Please don't mess it up for people who enjoy photography and contributing pictures.
Re: LDS and Niantic Games
I have received these edits so far today, two different LDS churches in two different cities in Alaska.
If I get anymore I'll be sure to take screenshots.
Edit: Not five minutes later and I got another one. The first two above are in Anchorage and Palmer, which are close enough that one person could visit both and personally submit the edit. This latest one is in Healy, which is nearly 5 hours away and is a town with a population of less than 900. One person doing this legitimately would require planning and commitment that seems incredible to me.
Edit: I've just received a fourth identical edit in less than an hour of reviewing.
Re: A statue which needs removal
Remember to keep bumping appeals before this current forum will be closed.
Re: Violations at Tao Dan park
Pretty sure this is a vendetta or some sort of personal interest against the Pogo community that the author of this post is doing what he was doing. The Pokestops are by no means in violations 1st thing, that place is like our 1 greatest joy and gathering, with pokestops gone , gyms will get dragged along. Please do what is right and do not remove the Pokestops and just let the people enjoy the game. It is already hard enough for Pogo players nowadays to find a place to play and the Pokestops are as authentic as they can be so no obvious reasons to remove them.
Re: Slight Location Edit- Due to relocation
You posted this in the wrong place. You can either post it in the location edits section of the forum, or the better way to do it is to login to the wayfarer website, navigate to the help page, and then tap the orange speech bubble icon in the corner. That will open the support chat and one of the things you can do is request a location edit. You will need evidence to prove the move is valid.
Re: Violations at Tao Dan park
Threatening to mass abuse the report function against another player could potentially result in action being taken against your own account, just so you're aware. You are expected to keep things civil on the forum. So you may want to retract what you're saying.
Re: Private Appeal Process Needed
While we are not aware of what methods Aaron has made to ascertain the property line, the topic of easements have been mentioned here:
As it stands currently, the benchmark for reviewing on easements is unstable which makes it a bad benchmark. It is highly impractical to check each submission property line for easement debates, I see why it is wise to err to caution.
I do not see how this issue would be resolved if you were to make a video without the full context of this decision. Making a video centerred on a single comment from one data point (note: "in this case") may compound the issue of people submitting incorrectly.
I also watched your video on the topic and to rehighlight: 40m within said property does not extend outside of the property (regarding parks next to single-family residences). Linking the AMA Question:
Can you clarify the definition of “private residential property?” Are multi-family residences included in this rejection reason? What about Wayspots that are within 40m of a private residence?
The considerations when looking at private residential property have not changed with the criteria refresh. Considering that multi-family residences like apartment complexes can have publicly accessible amenities (like playground equipment), these could still be eligible as long as they meet all of the acceptance criteria. Nominations that appear to be within 40m of private, single-family residential property should be very closely reviewed to make sure they are not on private residential property, and that they are accessible from locations not on private residential property
The proceeding statements are my personal understanding: being responsible to a part of city property does not always equate to the property line extending to the easement, it may just a requirement for property owners set by the local agency to manage the public property. Highly impractical from a reviewer's standpoint still.