Active submitter or multiple on a military base

SlicedPeas-INGSlicedPeas-ING Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭

I've been seeing a number of submissions for a military base lately. I'm not sure if any are being approved currently, but it would be nice if they could get a helpful nudge to stop doing that. I didn't capture a lot of them because I didn't realize it was going to be a lot of them.


«1

Comments

  • Theisman-INGTheisman-ING Posts: 1,000 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The problem is, and has always been, lack of communication from Niantic in clarifying what is said on the Forums to what the average submitter / reviewer reads on the help section.

    They have only ever clarified on here, and previously the ingress forums, that all submissions on military bases should be rejected. Where as on the help section of Wayfarer it only says if it interferes with the operation off.

    @NianticGiffard , is there any chance the rejection section can be reworded, its currently very wishy washy and goes against what is said on the forums.

    Take for instance the opening statement

    "Nominations and edit submissions may be entirely rejected if it meets at least one of the following rejection criteria"

    May be rejected, not should be rejected but may be.

    So K12 schools are only officially marked on the help section as something that may be rejected. So even though we all know schools should be rejected, the submitter or reviewer is juat vaguely told, a school may be rejected. Thats the equivalent of saying a k12 school may also be valid, which just isn't the case.

    Whats so hard about officially saying no to certain locations on the help sections

  • SlicedPeas-INGSlicedPeas-ING Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭

    It's still happening, and I can see from the duplicates that new submissions are being accepted.

    @NianticGiffard

  • AgentX1976-INGAgentX1976-ING Posts: 371 ✭✭✭✭

    The problem is that they have points of interest currently on the base and think they can have more. And if a few get through then new ones show up, but I hope most are getting rejected.

    Would be nice since they have geofenced some of those bases and not allowed wild pokémon to spawn if they just removed them or didn't allow nominations to be started on the bases.

  • Sunlitgarden-INGSunlitgarden-ING Posts: 139 ✭✭✭

    I have been running into quite a few military base submissions as well recently from Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington State, USA. Didn't save screenshots of the review screen (rejected all for sensitive location) but I do have the titles and coordinates:


    Adventures Unlimited Ingress Intel Map

    Ammo Country! Ingress Intel Map

    Pub and Deli Basketball Ingress Intel Map

    McChord Passenger Terminal Ingress Intel Map

    Det 12 Smokepit Ingress Intel Map

    Gazebo at McChord Ingress Intel Map -- This one had misleading supporting information "According to Wayfarer and recent Reddit AMA, base pokestops are acceptable if they are in public areas and don’t block emergency access or give away clasified access."

    23rd BEB Spearhead Tank Ingress Intel Map

    SAPPER Ghost country Ingress Intel Map

    STARBUCKS Ingress Intel Map


    Any way these can be geo blocked from appearing in the future?

  • SlicedPeas-INGSlicedPeas-ING Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭

    And now I'm getting them from Wyoming.

  • Daemare-PGODaemare-PGO Posts: 62 ✭✭✭

    I've gotten multiple from Peterson, as well as Fort Benning and Fort Belvoir. I know a few on Belvoir have gotten through. I've suggested geo-blocking bases before. It would be nice if our rating wasn't affected by these submissions we are supposed to reject but still get through...

  • SlicedPeas-INGSlicedPeas-ING Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭

    I would mostly like some clear guidance on how to deal with these submissions and to see something happen to limit them. Large military installations are full of otherwise acceptable criteria and we are already struggling to process all the things not automatically disqualified by location. I feel like Niantic could help by making it pretty clear this shouldn't even be submitted in the first place.

  • Daemare-PGODaemare-PGO Posts: 62 ✭✭✭

    I honestly wish it was a rejection option. It's lumped with Obstructs Emergency Services, which can be confusing, if not obscure.

  • SlicedPeas-INGSlicedPeas-ING Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭

    I think that is the simplest solution, I mean, if people get that as a rejection reason, that's pretty clear.

  • Sunlitgarden-INGSunlitgarden-ING Posts: 139 ✭✭✭

    I've been using Location Sensitive (because people keep pointing out that it's in a "non-emergency" portion of the base)

  • Daemare-PGODaemare-PGO Posts: 62 ✭✭✭

    Maybe we can poke Casey or Griffard during the next AMA about it.

  • MamaLlama619-PGOMamaLlama619-PGO Posts: 20 ✭✭

    So here's my confusion and question about military bases. Wish I'd saved some of the ones I reviewed to show as examples. My understanding is military bases are comprised of fenced off, gated entry, military base training/work centers, and then outside that is the housing and community, all considered part of the base. Absolutely, nothing within the gated base should be permitted. But I've gotten reviews from the surrounding communities-which are giant towns with grocery stores, parks, bars, playgrounds, restaurants, etc along with all the housing. These are military housing but roads lead to them anyone can drive on.

    Why do POIs outside of the gated, sensitive portions of bases need to be rejected? And, the hardest part for me is when viewing google maps, these communities aren't shaded or outlined so I really can't tell where the military base borders are.

  • flatmatt-PGOflatmatt-PGO Posts: 1,191 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My (very limited) experience with bases in the U.S. is that housing, schools, parks, etc. are very much found inside of the gates and fences of the base. If something is outside the fence, then I wouldn't consider it part of the base (for Wayfarer purposes).

  • TrevorAlan-PGOTrevorAlan-PGO Posts: 773 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Also other people live on base too... Retirees, family members. The housing on bases is built, owned, and maintained by a private 3rd party company. All military base housing has been privatized at this point.

  • tehstone-INGtehstone-ING Posts: 751 Ambassador

    I specifically request an official ruling on this a year ago and did not receive one.


    Prior to that, it was asked in November 2019 and answer by @NianticCasey-ING on the Ingress forums (before this forum was created)


    here's what Casey said then:


    Hi folks,

    Pergolas are potentially eligible if they're not on private property and are safely and publicly accessible.

    Drinking fountains as pictured in the OPs question are not eligible. Decorative water feature fountains are eligible.

    Unfortunately Military Bases aren't as straightforward as the other two questions: not considering wayspots on bases is a legacy decision that was recently revised. We haven't been reactively removing wayspots that are on bases unless requested to do so by a commanding officer of the base but no new wayspots should be approved if they're on a military base. As Andrew mentioned in the AMA, any wayspot on a military base should automatically receive a 1* review, surpassing any other potentially eligibility notes.

    Hope that helps!

    Edit: Hit post too soon. I'm working to get this clarified on the help content as I can see how this is confusing based on how the emergency services note is worded. The intention there is for wayspots located near a base that would otherwise interfere with their regular activity (e.g. a statue at the front gate that blocks access to the base).

    Sadly the help content still has not been updated as was promised then.

  • TrevorAlan-PGOTrevorAlan-PGO Posts: 773 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It's something that should be revised. It hasn't been an issue as the "craze" of when Pokemon Go came out is long dead. And my father was the commander of Peterson AFB and there was no problem with the current Wayspots on base and should NOT be removed. Sure they maybe shouldn't be on the airfield, or inside of buildings for things like the 21st space wing headquarters, but they should be at playgrounds, museums, etc. on base. People on base are people too who want to play Niantic games...

  • Sunlitgarden-INGSunlitgarden-ING Posts: 139 ✭✭✭

    The stuff I've posted in this thread is not the housing area playgrounds, it's stuff like this (just got another one)

  • TrevorAlan-PGOTrevorAlan-PGO Posts: 773 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well that's not a very good nomination anyways. Just a bench with a small "garden". Center of the picture is more the sidewalk. And just because it says Artillery doesnt mean its unsafe and there's gunshots flying around. But it's not a good one to begin with. And I'm not saying just because it's ON a military base it SHOULD be accepted. The rule against a base in general is asinine and unfair to those who LIVE on base and post. Many many kids or at least those who are too young or cant drive are stuck on base, and plenty of bases are in locations where there is absolutely nothing around them. The government likes to pick the cheapest land to build on so you end up with bases in the middle of diddly squat. I think Niantic needs to revisit this policy against military bases. As there is NOTHING unsafe about them, and I am inclined to approve eligible submissions that meet the criteria.

  • TrevorAlan-PGOTrevorAlan-PGO Posts: 773 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Also, with 100% certainty having wayspots on base is NOT a problem. @SlicedPeas-ING  and @Daemare-PGO posted about Peterson AFB. I have lived on Peterson multiple times over my life, and 2019-2020 my father was the commander of the 21st Space Wing and in command of Peterson AFB. The existing wayspots have NEVER been an issue, and I am all for having more be added that are acceptable and eligible otherwise. As I said the "craze" when PoGo came out and people were trying to trespass to catch a rare pokemon are long gone and over. It's 100% not an issue and not any concern anymore and this position banning bases needs to change.

  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 2,418 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I always thought that the restrictions regarding military bases are more related to this kind of issues: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42853072

  • TrevorAlan-PGOTrevorAlan-PGO Posts: 773 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Normal people live on base, families, children. Everybody has cell phones. And that's in Afghanistan which is totally different. Civilian dependants aren't going to afghanistan or classified locations or instillations. If you're inside the Pentagon, or Cite C-6 in Niceville FL, or the Cheyenne Mountain complex... You're not a civilian or dependant and not bringing your phone inside if you're active duty. But those arent Peterson AFB or Patrick SFB or Vandenburg AFB. Those have normal houses, grocery stores, recreational areas, parks, museums etc.

  • TrevorAlan-PGOTrevorAlan-PGO Posts: 773 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Military bases in the USA arent top secret warzones. They're basically self contained towns where people work, live, and play.

  • TrevorAlan-PGOTrevorAlan-PGO Posts: 773 ✭✭✭✭✭

    So thats a good point @WheelTrekker-ING , I think people thing that military bases are like, secret and unsafe. If it helps, think of a military base as just a large gated community. They just have guards that sometimes have guns at the front. Otherwise it's just a gated community. It's not like all the families, wifes, kids, husbands, retired grandparents can't have phones or use GPS on base. 😂

    And the other issue I know of is the trespassing issue which hasn't been a problem in years nor will it be a problem again. Considering look how many waspots are already on Peterson AFB and there has been 0 problems in years.

  • SlicedPeas-INGSlicedPeas-ING Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭

    The topic of this thread was for clarification on how reviewers should handle submissions under current guidelines. If you want to argue about the guidance itself, could you make your own thread?

  • Roli112-PGORoli112-PGO Posts: 2,100 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @TrevorAlan-PGO why are you going to disagree with the OP about their intention of the thread... your making an arguments, and admit you vote against criteria which has nothing to do with the OP's intentions of the thread, they didnt ask for general input but a clear updated and posted answer from Niantic... like the OP suggested, you are more than welcome to make your own thread on YOUR subjects.

  • TrevorAlan-PGOTrevorAlan-PGO Posts: 773 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I apologize. I have been a bit heated about this issue with other conversations elsewhere. Just drives me nuts and the lack of understanding what a military base is seems to be a big reason behind it. I'll take my rants elsewhere.

Sign In or Register to comment.