It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
Objects on PRP are ineligible, irrespective of sidewalk accessibility. No amount of “but this is an invitation” mental gymnastics gets through this restriction, which by all accounts has always been in place, has been debated countless times in this forum, and has not varied to this day.
Moreover, PRP is not only a rejection criteria, it’s a removal criteria, which should definitively demonstrate to any reasonable Wayfarer just how hard the wall of this standard is.
You are correct. However, "real life" has nothing to do with this. Niantic criteria say "LFL on PRP = no". Niantic game - Niantic rules. They are not going to change this .
The point of LFL is that the owner of private property is granting the access to the LFL by general public. Denying the nomination is the opposite of the intention of the private property owner.
Lets just think about that shall we.
Their intention, as so far as anyone knows without speaking to them directly, is to allow people access to books.
I cant imagine when placing an LFL in their garden they thought, I hope I get lots of strangers standing around outside my house at all times of the day to spin stops, hack portals, and if it turns into a gym I really want groups of 8+ people turning up and standing right outside my house.
Can't really see that as the reason the LFL was put there, but thats a distinct possibility of what could happen.
This is all beside the point anyway.
You are requested and required to reject all nominations on PRP. Your own opinion means nothing, what you believe the home owner intends also means nothing.
Niantic have said they are to be rejected and thats the final say in the matter.
Just because a property owner puts up an LFL doesn't mean they gave permission for people to be on their property for anything other than accessing the LFL to borrow/leave books. Besides, Niantic's criteria are very clear. Objects on PRP are to be rejected.
“I’m going to pretend nobody already addressed this argument, so I’ll rehash the same illogic that’s been countered several times in this thread alone!”
I just had to 1* my first LFL. Edge of property, nobody has to or would enter the property. Nobody gets bothered. It's a perfect spot for everything except PRP. I understand the rule, but I hate it. It's especially problematic because there are so many other existing wayspots on private property... whoever nominated this LFL will not understand why the other ones are ok.
It may vary from place-to-place, but in my city, the public right-of-way is 15' from the edge of the ROAD. The sidewalk does not extend 15', so the bare land beside the sidewalk is technically NOT on private property - it is the city's right-of-way.
A U.S. class-action lawsuit was filed against Niantic because PokeMonGo trainers had blocked their homes' driveway, trampled their garden, kept them up at night, etc.
Here is part of the agreement Niantic signed. Note that 40 meters is 131 feet - much farther than the 15-foot right-of-way from the road.
(f) Niantic will add specific instructions to the current review form that Niantic’s user-reviewers use to evaluate new POI submissions that direct user-reviewers to increase scrutiny regarding any proposed POI that may be located on or within 40 meters of a private single-family residential property, and POI that appear to be located in neighborhood parks. At a minimum, such instructions will include directions for the user-reviewer to examine the proposed POI using a variety of sources, including but not limited to mapping services maintained by private companies such as Google Maps. After such review, Niantic will use CRE to avoid placing the POI on any property that appears to the reviewer to be a single-family residential property.
(g) Niantic agrees that it shall manually review a statistically significant percentage of new POI submissions via a Niantic employee or contractor for the principal purpose of trying to avoid POI that are more likely to lead to issues with nuisance or trespass.
Note that is is frequently ignored by Niantic appeals & other internally sourced reviewers and has no reference in official published criteria.
I don't know that it is ignored. They're pretty consistent (although not 100%) about removing things on PRP. The text quoted just says we should look more carefully within 40 meters of PRP to make sure they aren't on PRP, not that wayspots can't be within 40m.
Если он находится в частной жилой собственности, то это недопустимо.