Should (Permanent) Markers On An Orienteering Trail Be Treated Like Holes On A Golf Course?
AScarletSabre-PGO Posts: 748 ✭✭✭✭✭
Now that we have the so-called "criteria refresh", I was wondering if we could have some clarity on orienteering trails. A park near me has a permanent trail. I see all kinds of people trying out the sport, from casual families to people wanting to compete the "World Orienteering Champtionships". Thus, it is the sort of sport that encourages people from all backgrounds to go outside and explore.
For those unaware as to what orienteering is:
Yes, individual stations on an orienteering trail are not eligiable, but the trail as a while is. These stations are individual goals, much like holes on a golf course, goals on a football field, or bases on a baseball field.
That is defo not the current criteria, thats the old one. Imo, if they are far enough apart and have sperate pictures/signs on them, the they encourage exploration (like, literally, that'd the whole point of orienteering) and exercise, so they each meet an acceptance criteria, they srent generic businesses, they arent mass produced, so long as they are different markets then they are unique, basically no rejection criteria but ate acceptable ones
It seems that now every sign is a great nomination. Pick a bunch of them on Home Depot and create your own PokePath.
Not every sign is a good nomination - not sure where you got that idea from. Niantic has said many times that generic road signs, mall signs and cemetery signs are not good candidates for Wayspots. Or had you forgotten?
I wouldn't be allowed to set up my own signs: I would be reprimanded for vandalism. Or are the laws different where you are? The orienteering trail in the park is an official trail. Niantic has stated many times that they want people to explore and orienteering is a sport that encourages exploration.
Using that reasoning, each hoop on a basketball court is eligible, each hole on a golf course is eligible, each goal on a football field is eligible, and each base on a baseball field is eligible. No, you are starting to sound like Gabriel by trying to stretch the criteria far beyond what was clearly intended. I don't think Niantic wanted things to be sliced down to such micro-levels. Niantic still wants quality Wayspots that encourages exploration, not as many Wayspots you can pack into a small area. Even with trails, it is clear they don't' want every trail marker along the path, just the ones that represent specific features of the trial, such as trail heads and junctions.
Each field is 1 poi. Gazzas89 has the right idea. I believe if its a sports course like dosc golf you’d get the head of it only. But for trails According to the most recent november ama for trail markers each trail marker is eligible not just the head or a junction. They do not mention that only the heads and a junction point are eligible but rather that all them are eligible as long as there is safe access and be something of a visual indicator (tangible)
Short answer: No.
Ill Start with that basketball one, thats not even close to being the same, its a basketball court yiu submit, not baskets, but even ignoring that, the hoops would be mass produced or not unique as there's another
The golf course one is even easier to explain why its different, safety would be the first, you can't wander onto a golf course playing on your phone, not to mention you arent even encouraged to go on golf courses unless playing golf
And no, you're the one trying to recreate rules. My logic is based on trail markers, orienteering is basically the same as trails, except instead of a straight path, its trying to find points, so the points can easily pass on the same logic as trail markers. Do you deny that orienteering encourages exercise? Do you deny that they encourage exploration? Can you name a single rejection criteria they meet? No? Didn't think so.
Don't be facetious about this, I explained it very easily and explained the guidelines correctly with current acceptable examples to go along with it, so please explain how I'm like Gabriel when its very logical and fits the criteria, without any weird reading or bending at all
Now grated this is from a pervious statements before 3.0 but i think it still hold merit. @NianticCasey-ING mentioned that they would be eligible "As long as the marker represents a trail it should be accepted. It should be something that is on the path of the trail, helps people find the path, has the trail name and is permanent." https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/comment/43957#Comment_43957
But like i said this is from before wayfarer 3.0 but not too far off. I would say all markers are eligible since they can "help people find the path"
Also in the November AMA, "While this criteria is much more inclusive than before, there would still need to be some sort of visual indicator of the Wayspot. This is because you're dropping a pin on the map and since trails are long and linear, you'd want to direct players to a safe location somewhere along that trail that's easy to find and safe to access. This would apply to trail markers, survey markers, trail signs, etc. "
now while this is just a game i don't see an issue with including all trail markers for using them as described above.
These aren't trail markers in that sense, though (and I think the use of the word "trail" in the thread title may be misleading some folks). These are markers that you're supposed to find through orienteering. It was also discussed in the past (before the 3.1 criteria) that an orienteering marker as a waypoint actually *discourages* participation in the sport. Finding the marker using your own wits and skills is the entire point of orienteering, and being able to use your GPS in the game just to walk right up to it defeats the entire purpose.
Hey, just to reattack this comment, I can't help but notice that you cited absolutely no evidence for your point beyond your "feeling" of what Niantic might have intended. Eventually you come to a conclusion that appears to be completely in opposition to the current guidelines.
Under the current guidelines, these markers (and yes, each hole on a golf course) meet no rejection criteria and would certainly seem to be excellent candidates for all three eligibility criteria. They are excellent places to exercise, excellent places to be social, and excellent places to get out and explore. I would be interested to know what your justification is for rejecting these PoI and where you think it falls short of the established criteria.
Niantic has stated before that the golf course as a whole is eligible but not each hole separately. Also when nominating any poi especially sports fields you are to nominate as to not interfere with the field of play. Putting a poi at every hole on a golf course or this case orienteering trail would interfere with the field of play of the game. I’m not going to dig through endless threads to find it but thats the general ruling.
you can take the advice or not, in the end if you nominate each and every hole your going to get a lot of rejections and then complain about it here. Then we’ll say “we told you so” and you can learn from it