November AMA - Your questions, answered!



  • garfieldfreakje-PGOgarfieldfreakje-PGO Posts: 211 ✭✭✭

    Still no answer on the discussion about the walking knot point or bycicle knot point in the netherlands and belgium

    Still don't know if i should reject them or not

  • DerWelfe2205-PGODerWelfe2205-PGO Posts: 374 ✭✭✭✭

    "Also on the horizon, although a bit further out, is adding appeals directly into Wayfarer. With regard to escalating incorrect rejections directly to Niantic, this is something that we’re thinking through."

    Nice. Can't wait to appeal all my rejected trail markers ^^

  • TheAuraStorm-INGTheAuraStorm-ING Posts: 88 ✭✭✭

    One of the better AMAs, but some answers have only made more questions.

    Removal of “Generic Business” as a rejection reason

    This seems very unnecessary, a generic business is a store / restaurant that has no or very little cultural or historical significance that it doesn’t deserve to be a Wayspot, places that come to mind are Starbucks, McDonalds, Wallmart, Costco and other chains. These quite obviously don’t meet criteria and rather than listing DMC as the reason for rejection, it is a bit of feedback to the submitter.

    Is “generic business” going to be split into more specific reasons like “generic sign”, “business without significance” or “retail chain” for example, or if we encounter some of the examples listed, do we just 1* and choose “doesn’t meet criteria”?

  • Rostwold-INGRostwold-ING Posts: 172 ✭✭✭✭

    I can see the new natural features rule causing issues. For example the most famous lake in the UK is Loch Ness, home of Nessie the monster, but it's 23 miles long which is going to make dupe-checking next to impossible.

    Oh, and am I the only one who had to google "cenotes"?

  • AisforAndis-INGAisforAndis-ING Posts: 1,050 Ambassador

    The removal of the "generic business" rejection seems like good idea at first, but what will be done to stop people from just using the catch-all "doesn't meet criteria" rejection reason instead?

    In almost every single instance where I have gotten a "nomination appears to represent a generic store or restaurant" rejection, the email has also specified the rejection reason for "Nomination does not meet acceptance criteria". Its never just generic business by itself.

    Regardless of the reason the reviewer gives for the rejection, these Wayspots are going to continue to be wrongly rejected and that's the real concern here.

    It is widely know that "honeypots" are used to test reviewers during the review process, and that user rating drops and cooldowns are utilized when reviewers fail these checks. I would strongly implore you to utilize the generic business button as a whole as a honeypot in the meantime, and redirect these users to the updated criteria. That's the only way they are going to truly learn.

  • flatmatt-PGOflatmatt-PGO Posts: 1,982 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2020

    I may be interpreting too much, but I think the answer is that it depends. You need to have both (1) a significant natural feature and (2) a well-defined, significant point to drop the marker.

    So assuming there is no sign for these natural features:

    A famous tree: Probably good.

    A famous lake with no features around it,or with a trail/road encircling it: Not good, as there is no specific place to put the wayspot.

    A famous lake with exactly one access trail/road that dead ends at the lake: Could be good if you place the wayspot at the shore where the trail/road ends?

    A famous lake with five different roads that dead end at the lake: Probably not good, but if one of those access points is particularly notable compared to the others, it could be good?

    Again, these are just guesses. I am also still confused.

  • TommetjeVE-PGOTommetjeVE-PGO Posts: 7 ✭✭

    Too specific of a discussion to dedicate an AMA question to it, but I think the hiking and biking trail question already answers it. These knot point routes are basically just trails, but even if they weren't they're still a great place for exercise. The only condition that they need to meet right now is that there is some kind of visual indicator of the Wayspot, so you can't just submit a footpath, but a trailmarker or trail sign is eligible. Even if they have no name on it. So all those wooden trail markers for hiking trails with numbers and arrows but no name, eligible. All those metal signs for biking trails with numbers and arrows but no name, also eligible. I know there are a bunch of the latter, but from how it is explained here in this AMA these simply should be acceptable. It is a visual indicator of a trail. I wonder if you would actually get them through though, I don't think a bunch of people read the AMA's, and even before that I couldn't get my named trail markers accepted.

  • garfieldfreakje-PGOgarfieldfreakje-PGO Posts: 211 ✭✭✭

    Well it would be easier to get them through if they would specify it because 90% of the people they think they aren't eglible because of no real name

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 726 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • SiIverLyra-PGOSiIverLyra-PGO Posts: 952 ✭✭✭✭✭

    A great AMA. Very informative, and provided answers to some issues that bugged me, as well as hope for future solutions.

    As others have commented here before, I must add my own worries about the removal of the "generic business" rejection reason. I can understand the sentiment behind it, but I still think this is a very valid and relevant reason for rejection, especially now that business submissions are actively encouraged.

    Just the last few days I've had to use that option several time. For instance, a submission of an electronics store that is part of a massive country-wide chain. Or a submission of a grocery store that's part of a small chain, in one of the countries' largest and most populated cities.

    (The chances that those submissions actually had any "local importance" are extremely slim - and even if they did, the nominators proved no information to support that.)

    What rejection option are we supposed to use for future cases?

  • Ellejayess-PGOEllejayess-PGO Posts: 46 ✭✭✭
    edited December 2020

    Memorial benches are typically more unique and interesting than unnamed trail markers, which are now eligible.

    The ones I'm thinking of often feature unique personalised poems written by locals.

    When the level of permanence/uniqueness is higher on these benches than some other newly-eligible items, you get the gist that the expansion of acceptability likely affects them too.

    You also see why we would benefit from niantic stating in plain english that the old "be notable" criteria ended with regards to them to. I mean, they've already said the old criteria is gone, but the message isn't getting through apparently, as people continue to quote it!

    ** To clarify how they meet the current criteria, many fit in "a place to exercise"》"a place to get fresh air/spend time in public space". This is because they are commonly located (in my area) along cycle/walk trails - the idea is you use them during your outdoors time, it encourages old people to get out and walk further if there are regular rest spots, and many of the personalised messages encourage exercise (such as being dedicated to local athletes who used the path). That said you might classify the plaques in "a place to explore" instead 》historial plaques 》things that "teach about the community and those who live there".

    Post edited by Ellejayess-PGO on
  • Ellejayess-PGOEllejayess-PGO Posts: 46 ✭✭✭
    edited December 2020

    I have another question if there is a december ama - we really need niantic to tell us if they consider playgroups eligible.

    They are very common meeting places for parents.

    I just got one rejected as GB (not a business), doesnt meet criteria (its a place to be social), and k-12 (that one's debatable - hence the need for clarification).

    So yeah, really looking to know if they are considered k-12.

    And if anyone knows what the current guidance is on scouts, shout out, I assume they are k-12 still.

  • WoodWose-PGOWoodWose-PGO Posts: 124 ✭✭✭✭

    It would be great to get some more clarification on this. I can think of a number of scenarios:

    1) A mountain hiking trail - the trail twists and turns up a mountain. There are several markers for the same trail that are relatively close together in a linear sense (say 40-60 yards), but it takes some steep trail hiking to reach each individual one. Most of the markers are simple direction and distance markers at important key points, and there is also a trail head sign.

    2) A long trail through a state park - The trail is relatively smooth and flat, and features about half a dozen elaborate but very similar signs all featuring the same trail name at various key points.

    3) A tourist trail through a small town - Most markers are mounted to a street sign post and are similar to the street signs they appear alongside. These markers occur on the corner of every other block passing through a historic retail district and also a park. There could be 15 signs that are all positioned along a 30 minute walk.

  • AnTorry22-PGOAnTorry22-PGO Posts: 5 ✭✭

    RESIDENTIALLY FOCUSED LOCATIONS” = ineligible if POOL is on homeowners associations, clubhouses, small neighborhood pools ? these don’t have lifeguards.

    and the eligible pool examples of were all athletic/exercise/even potential chain gym base right?

    im okay with this. It will encourage exercise but curb the more dangerous pools


    Thanks. For update @NianticCasey-ING

  • Euthanasio2-PGOEuthanasio2-PGO Posts: 272 ✭✭✭
    edited December 2020

    This is great, but I disagree a lot with the whole park should be the only wayspot. Some people live in rural areas and nominating individual games in the parks is the only way they can have many waypoints. It drastically improve the game for people who do not live in big cities and plenty of parents are happy to play with their kids SAFELY without going downtown where it can be hard to check their kids. The park next to my home has tons of pokemon players because each game was submitted individually and if people did not do that... well we would have a lot less players in my area.

    And I am sorry, but going to a place with only one waypoint is boring. I don't get why you are saying it should be only one waypoint. Pretty much all reviewers accept individual games already...

  • TecpatlW-PGOTecpatlW-PGO Posts: 4 ✭✭

    Súper, pero en latino América sigue la discusión con las k-12 ya que por ejemplo en México no se maneja el sistema educativo como en USA, ya que en la versión en inglés se mensionan las preparatorias y en la versión en español no sería bueno aclarar ese punto

  • rodensteiner-INGrodensteiner-ING Posts: 1,677 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @NianticCasey-ING there are big translation errors into Germany, since 1 year. Why dont you correct these errors? Basicly there are things that get accepted because of these errors, and things that are getting rejected.

  • PoMaQue-PGOPoMaQue-PGO Posts: 252 ✭✭✭✭

    The knot points mentioned are not part of a trail, which has a beginning, markers and an end.

    Knot points are part of a network, spread all around and people use them to make up their own routes. You could for example decide that your route goes from Point 1 to Point 2, walk only 10m and decide that this is your "Trail".

    The minimum for me would have to be a fixed trail, that was designed with a specific purpose, i.e. guide you through cultural landmarks and specific sights. Those also have a unique name on them.

  • GuaraniPy7-PGOGuaraniPy7-PGO Posts: 3 ✭✭

    Muchas gracias por estas aclaraciones. Enriquecen mucho nuestra labor como verificadores. Y motiva a seguir dando lo mejor para ir mejorando la comunidad. 

Sign In or Register to comment.