Welcome to the Bug Reporting page! Please refer to these tips when submitting new bug reports:
1. Browse the known issues section or check if another user previously posted about a similar issue.
2. Upvoting posts help us understand how many players are experiencing the bug.
3. Refer to the Best Practices to learn how to write a bug report.
4. File each issue separately if you’ve encountered multiple issues.

Users are able to abusively move pins 2 miles away from the suggested location while reviewing

AisforAndis-INGAisforAndis-ING Posts: 1,046 Ambassador

As has been documented very lengthily in abuse reports connected to the St. Cloud community here, here, here, here, here, and here, users are able to suggest new locations and move pins as far as 2 miles away from the submitted location while reviewing, leading to highly exploitative behavior and mass cases of abuse. Given the restrictions on move edits on live wayspots, this seems to be unnecessary, unintended, and quite an oversight. Please fix.

12 votes

New · Last Updated


  • holdthebeer-INGholdthebeer-ING Posts: 170 ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 2021

    Wow. 100m should be enough to move marker from the middle of football field into the corner / to the goal post. If poi is 2km off it's just 1 star wrong location.

  • AisforAndis-INGAisforAndis-ING Posts: 1,046 Ambassador

    Yeah, the current distance is pretty insane. 100m is about perfect. The most lengthy "legitimate" move I can really think of might be moving the pin out of the center of a sports field. As long as the new minimum isn't so short that it impairs that, I would think it would be fine. Anything further can get hit with location mismatch.

  • kitanchik-INGkitanchik-ING Posts: 77 ✭✭

    if we are talking about a long distance - if the real spot is even 30m away (depends on density and many other factors sure) - it at least should be rejected as mismatch location, and may be as a fake nomination (as wanna the portal at home).

    but the point is - the spots are moving implicitly inside the voting. and who knows how many of reviewers use the option, may be one of 50 just stupidly wants to be accurate (оr for spite) and moves it. and the spot appears in the different place.

    if the spot gets low rating in the location tab - accept it or not, if it appears - people can submit the edit of nomination, NIA can to not let out the nomination, they can initialize the edit of the spot before it appears, then reviewers will agree with that more accurate location or not. in all ways it should not be moved implicitly by someone nobody know who.

    i have my 3 spots edited same way, NIA dont want to answer me. and you know what - i understand, that if most of reviewers will just rate the location by 3-4* without moving it , then one offended by the whole world guy can just move the spot and autorate that green move by 5*. and voila - the revenge on the world is complete. have it.

  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,710 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Two miles is excessive. If a suggested new location is way beyond this, it should just be rejected outright as location inaccurate because someone is most likely gaming the system. But, oh wait, the marker of the [REDACTED] is away from the object in map, so... we rate it 3 stars for accuracy and we're actually not meant to move the pin to the actual object?

    Either way, it's stupendous that for example (in a sample size of 50), 40 people can 5 star it for location, and like a handful of people can suggest a new location even though it is already fully accurate and voila, just like what kitanchik said above, the world is on fire.

    Reviewers aren't there to remedy people's nominations or their atrocious move edits, so given that suggesting a move with just a couple of actors is powerful enough to completely dislodge or shift a nomination, even if it is already pinpoint accurate, it's an interesting thought.

  • TheZodiac007-PGOTheZodiac007-PGO Posts: 860 ✭✭✭✭✭
Sign In or Register to comment.