Rejected nomination - could use help/insight

Hi all,

I have a rejected nomination for a free mini street library and could use some help improving the nomination, or at least get some insights as to why it was rejected.

My nomination is -as said- a free miniature street library (which are eligible), placed at the absolute outer border of a (residential) garden. It is publicly accessible 24/7, 365 days a year and placed by a local volunteering organisation with explicit permission by the residents.

The thing that strikes me, is that this nomination was rejected due to it seemingly being on private property, which a part of me understands, but I also see a TON of free mini street libraries being accepted just fine, even if they are on the absolute outer border of a (residential) garden, like my nomination. It confuses me and I would love some insight as to why this particular nomination was rejected and other very similar nominations/wayspots are not. I also feel like sending in an appeal, but I am not sure where to do that…

If I were to send in a new nomination for this Wayspot, what things could I look at to improve this nomination? Although I am not looking forward to that process, because I am currently looking at a waiting time of over a year to get nominations through the reviewing system, not using upgrades. (If I were to use upgrades it depends on how much time I have to properly review about 200+ nominations to get an upgrade)

Anyway, would love your help/feedback on this one!


  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 5,063 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You say it is outside the property line, but that doesn't mean that reviewers aret going to take your word for it. They must be able to absoltuely confrirm that the Wayspot is not on private residential property and if there is any doubt or otherwise remotely questionable, they are obligated to rejected it.

  • VladDraco-PGOVladDraco-PGO Posts: 560 ✭✭✭✭

    Can you add a link to the website in supplementary information, maybe it can help ?

    I think there's a picture of this library on the main page.

  • Thanks! That actually sounds like a great idea. Hadn’t thought of that when I submitted it.

  • Thanks for all your feedback guys, cleared up a few things! Will reconsider a resubmit. It does kinda suck though, Niantic says mini libraries are eligible, but apparently not when they are even an inch on private property… that feels kinda weird and confusing. I get that not many reviewers realise this!

  • Melurra-PGOMelurra-PGO Posts: 421 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It's not really confusing when you think about it this way: rejection criteria supersede any potential eligibility. Just because something is an eligible object does not make it acceptable if the location is rejectable or something else about the nomination fits auto-reject criteria.

    • Private residential property or farm is automatically rejectable. So if a point of interest is on private residential property, it is ineligible even if it would be acceptable if not on private residential property. (Your LFL example, or like how some rich people commission murals or sculptures on their property, those are also ineligible due to their location, not because of what they are.)
    • Schools for students <18 years old (aka, K-12) are rejectable. For example, playgrounds and baseball fields are normally eligible, but if they are located on school grounds, they are not acceptable.
    • Unacceptable photos (dark, identifiable faces, etc.) are rejectable. Even if the wayspot submitted is a generally eligible church or something, if the photo is so dark you can't **** what it is, the nomination should be rejected.
    • Unacceptable title or description (has player usernames/player real names, uses URLs or emojis, mentions aspects of a certain game, is plagiarized from a third-party source, hate speech/harassment) = rejectable, even if the nomination is perfectly eligible otherwise.

    That being said, and based on the majority of the comments here, the LFL in your nomination should not be resubmitted. It is ineligible due to its location.

  • VladDraco-PGOVladDraco-PGO Posts: 560 ✭✭✭✭

    Objects on private property are not eligible because Niantic don't want to be sued by people complaining about gamers coming to their property.

    In this case, the property's owner ALLOWED the city to install a free public library on the border of their property.

    (See the link up)

    So assuming they will complain about people coming, and the court condemning Niantic for this is just ridiculous.

  • Theisman-INGTheisman-ING Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2021

    Objects on private residential property are not allowed, thats the end of the discussion.

    There are no ifs, no buts or maybes.

    It doesn't matter who installed it, why or what fors, Its not allowed.

    As to your comment

    "So assuming they will complain about people coming, and the court condemning Niantic for this is just ridiculous."

    Its not ridiculous, at a LFL there is an expectation to have a few people a day make use of it, not a possible constant stream of game players, with the possibility of them turning up in mass for a gym battle, IFS event, wizard battle etc.

    Post edited by Theisman-ING on
  • X0bai-PGOX0bai-PGO Posts: 1,667 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Part of the lawsuit Niantic lost was a homeowner who lived next to a public beach access road. The beach access was there before they moved in. Scores to hundreds of people went by there every day before Pogo was even released; it is *public access*.

    It wasn’t even part of their property.

    *Niantic still lost the lawsuit.*

    So no matter how you think you can split the difference in your own mind, the courts and Niantic have already agreed that you are wrong. This LFL and anything like it, on or beside private property, is ineligible, period.

  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 5,063 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Objects on private residential property are not allowed, thats the end of the discussion.


  • Don’t let it escalate guys 🙈

    I see all pov’s. I would just like to add that this nomination was made in a little village with merely 10 pogo players total (if I am not mistaken, it’s certainly not a lot more than that number), of which most are full-well adults with full time jobs, so I am certain the owners of this residency won’t have extra “discomfort” from us walking by maybe once a day at max. The thing is that, because it’s a small town, we don’t have that many pokestops, so it’s not very appealing to take a walk around the block after a long day of work to fill up on utilities and catch a few poke’s. So naturally we wanted to improve that experience and with the ability to nominate POI’s you just try to find whatever seems reasonably eligible. Unfortunately we also don’t have that many POI’s to begin with, so that also kind of sucks, but I still get the point where Niantic has to draw a line somewhere.

    Luckily for us villagers, the city counsel and some organisations are working on more art and educational stuff about the village, like the memorial stones for deported Jews. Very important to keep that memory alive and maybe it will also get us some more POI’s for Wayspot nominations. I guess we just have to be a bit more patient on getting better options :)

  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 5,063 ✭✭✭✭✭

    What part of "objects on private residential property cannot be Wayspots" do you not get? This rule is non-negotiable no matter what kind of sob story you tell.

  • Not related to this nomination specifically, but more so a general lesson - never assume you speak for the entirety of your local player base. If it's possible for a location to be used inappropriately, you should assume it will be.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 696 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Missed this?

    I guess we just have to be a bit more patient on getting better options :)

  • I wasn’t sobbing. What part of “adult with a full time job” did you not understand?! I don’t sob over a mobile game. I can spend my energy better. I was merely explaining where I came from and that that nomination seemed fine to all of us in my local community. It turns out we were all wrong. That happens. That’s all, no need to get sassy or whatever. And yes, in this case I CAN speak for the entire local community (of 10 players), because I speak with all of them on a daily basis and I talk to them about this topic and our nominations as well. So I actually know their opinion and their knowledge base.

    Like I said before: we will simply wait for better nominations to come up.

    For me, this is the end of this discussion. Thank you for your input.

Sign In or Register to comment.