Introducing the India Wayfarer Challenge: 16 - 26 March Learn More

Question on suspect strategically-placed nominations.

I have been active on Wayfarer for a few days now, and have run into a few nominations that I would like some clarification on.

In the Supporting Information section, I have sometimes seen comments such as 'Lots of people play in this area, it would be good to get another pokestop here', or 'XYZ village is very rural and has very few pokestops'.

Now, I understand from the criteria that pokestops which are only placed to provide an advantage to a group should be rejected. But some of these are pokestops which i think would be legitimately good, though posted for the wrong reason and with poor justification.

Do I reject these nominations for trying to gain an advantage? Or should I approve them on the grounds that the pokestop would be good, but nominated for the wrong reasons?

Comments

  • flatmatt-PGOflatmatt-PGO Posts: 261 ✭✭✭
    edited January 16

    You should just ignore comments like that in the supporting information. They certainly don't help the submitter's case, but you don't need to rate more harshly, either. If it's a good nomination, and it's located accurately at the best choice of locations, then you can rate it as such.

    I tend to interpret "provide an advantage to a group" to only include nominations where the submitter is trying to get you to vote in a way that you wouldn't otherwise vote, like placing the pin in a specific non-notable location on a building instead of at the entrance and telling reviewers not to move the pin.

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 618 ✭✭✭✭

    If the location is accurate then its fine but if location isnt accurate it would be abuse.

Sign In or Register to comment.