Postboxes

2»

Comments

  • NorthSeaPoet-INGNorthSeaPoet-ING Posts: 866 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Postboxes don't meet criteria. It's not hard to grasp. As for play equipment or the play park, I can't speak for any you've seen, but all the ones I've seen, the equipment has always had a different design to the other parks, so I'd hazard a guess and say that they're not pass produced in the same way that most postboxes are. You can tell the difference between 2 different slides easily, you can't tell the difference between two postboxes with the same design and the same Cypher. But if the park doesn't have a sign, I'm gonna take a photo of what's inside to use as the anchor photo.

    At this point, I think it would be easier if NIA removed all the postbox wayspots. It would save a lot more of this "bit the reviewers still like them!!". I like them but I can't justify twisting round criteria to make them fit, when they evidently don't meet criteria any more.

  • AScarletSabre-PGOAScarletSabre-PGO Posts: 516 ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 1

    If NIA removed all postbox Wayspots it will have to face the wrath of a large number of (UK) players. Niantic has irked enough people already with it's shenanigans, I don't see why it they would want to poke another hornets nest. I'd leave leave the postboxes alone if I were Niantic. Nothing good will come from removing them.

  • Dazzz123456-PGODazzz123456-PGO Posts: 294 ✭✭✭

    What is ironic here is that so many from the UK wayfarer group desperately argued about certain Postboxs that I'm guessing that are in their area. Now they are in they have the total opposite opinion on EIIR postboxes not using the same arguments as they once did

  • gazzas89-PGOgazzas89-PGO Posts: 901 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I gave you several reasons why they should be accepted and that isn't isn't bending or twisting criteria to fit


    Ok, let's go.with another one. Several mugas in the UK are mass produced, they are mostly done by arena and they look almost exactly identical even down to the fence round the outsides of them having the same distance between each link of the fence, would you use mass produced to reject these?


    Why should they? What removal criteria do they meet exactly? If they remove them why stop there? Why not remove other things that a few vocal minor on here don't like?

  • Eneeoh-PGOEneeoh-PGO Posts: 394 ✭✭✭✭

    There are several pyramids in Egypt, and they mostly look pretty much the same. Are you trying to claim that they were mass-produced? Of course sports fields and courts are similar to others of the same kind, this is called standardization. Multi-use facilities are made to accommodate several different activities. This does not make them mass-produced.

    Mailboxes are built on a production line. If one becomes damaged, an identical one can be dropped into its place. Such objects are called mass-produced.

    This is not difficult terminology. A sports field is a location that may be a point of interest. A mailbox is a mass-produced object.

  • gazzas89-PGOgazzas89-PGO Posts: 901 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You do realise everything everything goes into making the mugas I'm talking about are quite literally done on a production line right? They aren't bespoke, they are all made the exact same way to the exact same dimensions with the exact same paint job and treatments

  • AScarletSabre-PGOAScarletSabre-PGO Posts: 516 ✭✭✭✭

    In the UK, if a postbox becomes damaged, to the point of needing replacing, it isn't necessarily replaced with one of the same type. I once went on a walk in the countryside to look for a rare type of King Edward VII postbox, only to Discover the Google Street View was out of date and it had been replaced with a far newer postbox from the era of Queen Elizabeth II.

    Historic England has a great article explaining why the postboxes should be appreciated:


  • NorthSeaPoet-INGNorthSeaPoet-ING Posts: 866 ✭✭✭✭✭

    MUGAs promote exercise and could be used as a place to socialise, since people would likely be playing ball games with others at a MUGA.

    A postbox doesn't do any of that.

    That's the difference. It's literally not hard to grasp.

    Plenty of other things that can be submitted, so I don't get why you're being so hung up on postboxes.

  • gazzas89-PGOgazzas89-PGO Posts: 901 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You clearly don't get my argument do you? My argument is that we can overlook rejection criteria when it suits, mugas are mass produced, yet we overlook that


    And yiu know what, you're wrong, you're just wrong, I listed what criteria that post boxes meet, scarletsabre has linked a reason for why they meet criteria, you saying hey just don't is wrong, simple as that.


    Here's a question, why do you and the other vocal minority not want them? It helps every game out, it helps everyone out it populates noantics maps that they then sell. It meets criteria for historical and cultural importance, they can be found while exploring, I could even start stretching to make them social places that people meet up at. If your argument is "mass produced" then you jabe to accept that mugas arw mass produced and should be rejected too

  • NorthSeaPoet-INGNorthSeaPoet-ING Posts: 866 ✭✭✭✭✭

    No, I get your argument, I just think it's a weak argument.

    Niantic stated in the past they're not eligible and based on current criteria, it's a stretch to say they meet it.

    It's not that I don't want them, it's that they've been deemed ineligible. The idea that this postbox or that postbox is only acceptable because it has the right cypher was always a ridiculous concept. I've argued in the past for focusing on the uniquer designers of postboxes such as the Ludlow, as one example, instead of the cypher. But at the end of the day, I struggle to see how any postbox fits into the current criteria.

    "Helping out every game" and "populating Niantic's maps" aren't strong arguments for postboxes - you could use those same arguments for memorial benches, public footpath and bridleway markers, trees, etc.

  • gazzas89-PGOgazzas89-PGO Posts: 901 ✭✭✭✭✭

    "Deemed inellegible" is pretty much wrong too, the weren't deemed unelligible, it was still down to the reviewers, and that was coming off a loaded question (go have a look at all the comments on reddit and these forums at the time to see that the massive consensus was that the question was loaded to get them ineligible and it failed)


    And again, you aren't providing g an argument for why they should be rejected, your only ones so.far is niantic said ineligible, that's wrong, mass produced, which I've countered with several other things meeting rejection criteria ... and that's it. After that, it you that's of the opinion that they don't meet a criteria, yet I've provided several ones they meet as has scarlet sabre added to it. Face it, you have no argument other than you (and a vocal minortity) don't want them, and can't give a proper valid reason that's consistent with other things.


    None of those meet criteria like post boxes do.

  • NorthSeaPoet-INGNorthSeaPoet-ING Posts: 866 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Ah, the loaded question argument again. I recall you using that on reddit a while ago. The person that asked the "loaded question" was also the person that under the Ingress AMA got postboxes as a valid wayspot submission in the first place anyway.

    It's not that I don't want postboxes - I'm actually neutral in my feelings about them - it's that it's a massive stretch to say they meet criteria now. Take into account that there's a lot of submitters that don't even understand the history of postboxes, let alone the difference between the cyphers, or the designs, that just sub them because they think it's an easy accept. You haven't even provided an argument beyond "they're eligible submissions" or that they shouldn't be rejected for being mass produced because we're told "accept MUGAs and trail markers!". Why should one cypher be more eligible than another cypher? Why are we even focusing on cyphers when the more unique designs, like the Penfold, the Ludlow, and so on, that have a history to them beyond "was installed in the time of this particular monarch" would be vastly more interesting as wayspots?

    Based on your argument about postboxes filling up the maps and helping out other games, the other mass produced objects I listed would also be valid because they would also fill the maps and help out other games. So, you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of doing and ignoring one lot of mass produced objects as they're ineligible in favour of other mass produced objects that are eligible.

  • YouLostAStar-INGYouLostAStar-ING Posts: 268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That is incorrect, when we first started arguing for rarer postboxes we found some estimates online for how many George and Victoria boxes there were. It wasn’t until after the original AMA question that we got the actual figures that we discovered that some of the boxes we originally thought were quite rare were actually much more common than we originally thought. Especially when in a reviewing session 8 out of every 10 reviews was a postbox that was pre EiiR and one submitter say they walked around their town and use all their submission on GR boxes.

    bottom line is we messed up, and I have held my hands up to my mistake. We should have got the accurate figures before arguing the case to Niantic the first time

  • VIPZMCSWAG-PGOVIPZMCSWAG-PGO Posts: 8 ✭✭

    I tend to reject most that isn't a EVIII or a Ludlow as those are incredibly rare. However I think that older postboxes (Victoria/EdwardVII) should be considered if they are in a low density area

  • HankWolfman-PGOHankWolfman-PGO Posts: 305 ✭✭✭✭

    Just to point out, rarity isn't a qualifier for whether something should or should not be a wayspot. If it was, then by your own standards, things like little free libraries would be ineligible as they are too common - they greatly outnumber George V postboxes (there are less than 18,000 George V postboxes, but more than 100,000 little free libraries). You'd probably also have to reject football pitches and playgrounds if rarity was a qualifier.

  • AScarletSabre-PGOAScarletSabre-PGO Posts: 516 ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 18

    Yes, true. I happen to get more excited by an older postbox than a generic football pitch or even one of those Little Free Libraries. Many tourists are fascinated by the street furniture of our green and pleasant land. Just look at how many views this video from a tour guide has racked up in less than a year (over 100,000 views), which does highlight the postbox types:

    London Treasure Hunt Street Paraphernalia Challenge

    https://youtu.be/a03_BWHJlEc

  • HankWolfman-PGOHankWolfman-PGO Posts: 305 ✭✭✭✭

    People using the rarity argument are incorrect to do so. If they are submitting them, they should be using the argument that postboxes are protected heritage assets that are recognised by Historic England as being culturally and historically important, and that they add to the character of their surrounding locations. That actually has some meaning behind it (and is factual - Historic England do have a postbox policy on their website that is available to view as a PDF), rather than just saying "this George V postbox is uncommon, give wayspot pls".

    Regarding the mass produced object rule, I did have a think about this last night when I was reading the thread, and I was curious what everyone would do in the following hypothetical situation: Someone nominates a Model T Ford (a real, original Model T, that once was used for driving in), that is now permanently on display somewhere (let's say it's at Ford's headquarters). The Model T is now fixed in place, so it won't suddenly be driving off anywhere, and is being displayed as a piece of Ford's automotive history. It's undoubtedly interesting to many people and does have historic and cultural significance. However, as an original Model T, it came off a production line that produced 15,000,000 Model Ts up until 1927. Would you still reject that for being mass produced, or do you overlook the rule in that case because you see how it has value as a point of interest?

    If you choose to stick steadfastly to the rule, you end up rejecting a nomination which has been demonstrated to have historic and cultural significance, and is very much a point of interest for a lot of people. If you choose to ignore the rule though, then it effectively transitions from being an absolute rule, to being a flexible guideline (at which point, the Wayfarer rulebook starts to sound like it's becoming the Pirate Code from Pirates of the Caribbean).

    I'm not saying that we should throw caution to the wind when it comes to what the guidelines say we should and shouldn't do. The guidelines obviously exist for a reason after all, and there are certain rules which are most definitely absolute (K-12 and PRP, for example). We are all human though, and we have brains with which we can exercise a certain level of judgment when it comes to what we see whilst reviewing. If this level of judgment was not wanted or required, then the Wayfarer process could be almost entirely automated, and none of us would need to be here having this lovely discussion (which is now beginning to deviate from what was a simple inquiry about the potential merits of the humble British postbox).

  • Eneeoh-PGOEneeoh-PGO Posts: 394 ✭✭✭✭

    Do you refer to a niche, wherein a single automobile has been raised on a literal pedestal? That unique, interesting or special exemption has already been addressed.

    We can all enjoy such curated rarities without going back through the circular argument again.

  • NorthSeaPoet-INGNorthSeaPoet-ING Posts: 866 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thank you. You've explained it better than what I have been.

    As I've stated before, I'm neutral about postboxes but I do find it's a stretch to say they meet current criteria.

    In regards to the pro-postbox crowd, the player that used the rarity argument to get them approved in the first place has repeatedly held their hands up and accepted responsibility for the issues that have been caused with postboxes now in NIA games.

  • purplepopple-INGpurplepopple-ING Posts: 185 ✭✭✭


    Post office boxes are a great big no for me. There should be no special rules for them other than the historical or cultural and visual uniqueness. This British obsession with categories that should be allowed bleeds over to other countries who see it as full on permission for all post boxes to be submitted.

  • NorthSeaPoet-INGNorthSeaPoet-ING Posts: 866 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have to admit, these ones you've posted don't look particularly special, but I agree, my country's obsession with postboxes has a knock on effect. I know when I had my bonus location as Portugal, shortly after pokéstop nominations were made available there (prior to the Global roll out), there were a lot of postboxes being nominated there as well.

    Given how many times they've been argued for and against on these forums, as well as in Facebook groups, it's no wonder that some players, regardless of country, think they're an acceptable thing to nominate.

Sign In or Register to comment.