NSW State Survey Markers

More must be done to combat the constant influx of Survey Markers in NSW. These nominations do not meet any of the eligibility criteria, these markers are mass produced, near identical items with no cultural or historical value. They are not a great place for exploration, great place for exercise or a great place to be social with others. They are located at regular intervals along the kerb of every street in the state and as such they are are often in the front yard or on the driveway of family homes. And yet despite all this, not only are these markers submitted in their hundreds every day, they are constantly being accepted by reviewers.

See the below duplicate maps taken from recent submissions:

You can see just how common these markers are on the state database. https://maps.six.nsw.gov.au

Survey Markers are by far the most common submission I encounter while reviewing, I would estimate around 20% of all nominations I review are survey markers, and I am not the only one who is fed up.

Submitters will often include the in-game existence and prevalence of Survey Markers in their Supporting Evidence to justify their submission. It is also common to read the phrase "This an eligible submission according to Niantic - Geodetic Sign" with submitters creating a false equivalency by implying that because an appropriate label exists, the nomination must be eligible. I would like to point out that 'Snow and Ice' and 'Private Home' are also labels that can be chosen in the What is it? section despite being specifically prohibited.

Further exacerbating the problem is the fact that these nominations will occasionally show up on the Wayfarer homepage as part of Niantic's 'Featured Waypoints'.

There's not much more to say, while I would love Niantic to take a stand and mass delete these waypoints I know that's not going to happen. It would be great if Niantic could at least create a specific 'Generic, Mass Produced Item' rejection category that could be used in these situations as well as when dealing with the occasional nomination of street signs and bus stops.



  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,596 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BiggestBluest-ING what do you recommend be done about these survey marks?

    If you're in the SydRes Discord, you'll notice someone in particular ranting about reviewers being "picky" about their survey marks in the #Wayfarer channel. Consider starting there.

    By the way, I've noticed a lot of fleshed out description edits for the Walk the Walls Festival in Cronulla featuring the name and more information for each of them. It's quite nice (don't know if it's you, but making a wild stab in the dark assumption).

  • iDionz-PGOiDionz-PGO Posts: 36 ✭✭

    Niantic once said these are Eligble. People tried to submit them and they got rejected. For obvious reasons too because they look nothing worthwhile.

    The literal only reason they’re mass submitted and accepted is because of the first thing you see when you open up wayfarer website, was there featured section. and for Sydney NSW it was Lithgow that got featured. And they submitted survey markers and a few got thru. So for a good 6 months or so all 3 featured things were survey markers. Every week it would change and 2-3 new survey markers so when someone opened up wayfarer to review would one would show for a featured wayspot and when people reviewed they would think well I saw one as a featured wayspot so why not.

    If it wasn’t for that this thread would of never happened.

    You try submitting these anywhere else In the world or even anywhere else in australia for that fact they simply won’t get accepted no matter how hard you try.

    and yes I’ve submitted a few in my time. Why? Because they got accepted and occupied my time whilst in lockdown.

  • ExPlatypus35z-PGOExPlatypus35z-PGO Posts: 23 ✭✭

    I don’t like when things get rejected for pedestrian access, we’re not idiots the game has a wide radius even if a stop is in the middle of the street we can reach it from the sidewalk.

  • Casliber-PGOCasliber-PGO Posts: 3 ✭✭

    If anyone actually walked rather than drove, then they'd realise that these suburbs with "loads" of SSMs are actually quie widely spaced really. Given COVID, is better that people spread out to play rather than all gather. They might be uninteresting but are they any less interesting than a swing set in a playground or some random local small park sign? Really? Are they really that offensive? Then don't interact with them. About half the SSMs are on footpaths anyway - I don't think I've seen ones on the road get through. And they are geocaching targets BTW.

  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,596 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bluejet-PGO do you have a problem?

  • bluejet-PGObluejet-PGO Posts: 16 ✭✭

    I don’t believe one person telling others reviewers to reject them is informative. Spreading misinformation is incorrect. It has long believed that these markers have been approved long ago by many of the Niantic staff. Ive even seen someone from Niantic themselves approve them recently as well - from a community member. With the Niantic reviewers taking part of the new review system with the balloon icon next to a contribution.

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 3,187 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @AeriTheBOFH-PGO Certainly different styles but there are plenty of places where you can stand right on top of a wayspot and still not be able to ultrastrike mods. I just got home from the San Francisco financial district, which means lots of tall buildings and hella GPS drift. I neutralized 252 portals and the only time I used ultrastrikes was when I wanted to knock the mods off of one so I could farm it.

    I'm pretty sure the reason Niantic requires safe pedestrian access is that they don't want bad PR and legal liability for people doing stupid stuff to get to wayspots. Imagine some player getting hit and killed because they decided to run across a busy road to get to a wayspot in a median. That would probably end up with a lot of press and a lawsuit.

  • bluejet-PGObluejet-PGO Posts: 16 ✭✭

    I don’t believe one person telling others reviewers to reject them is informative. Spreading misinformation is incorrect. It has long believed that these markers have been approved long ago by many of the Niantic staff. Ive even seen someone from Niantic themselves approve them recently as well (not my nomination). With the Niantic reviewers taking part of the new review system. There is a category for them. Look at the screenshot.

  • AgentX1976-INGAgentX1976-ING Posts: 521 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think there is a big diffrence between survey markers for roadways and the national survey markers used to mark elevation, borders and mountain tops.

  • Casliber-PGOCasliber-PGO Posts: 3 ✭✭

    Many are buried, destroyed or on roads, or unsightly. I find the nicer-looking ones on footpaths are the most likely to get through. There aren't that many. Is easy to get a large suburb map and freak out about how many there are. What harm does it do? Many areas are have literally nothing else to tag.

    Anyway, I usually vote 5/5/4/2/4..and 3 or 5 depending on whether I can see them or not (as long as the area looks plausible). And yes they are geodetic signs. Bam.

  • bluejet-PGObluejet-PGO Posts: 16 ✭✭

    Apologies for the double post. That upload didn’t appear the first time but apparently it was delayed. Posting from my phone.

  • Stephyypooke-INGStephyypooke-ING Posts: 506 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Any post that contains a photo has to be approved by a Niantic moderator and it can take a while sometimes.

  • Stephyypooke-INGStephyypooke-ING Posts: 506 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I meant posts on this forum containing photos need mod approval which is why bluejet’s comment was delayed. I was not talking about photo submissions.

  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,596 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You're right. Wayfarer is about the community's decision, so I can't really say to people to reject things. I agree that survey marks were touted by the former Ingress Community Manager Andrew Krug that they were eligible on public pathways. Some survey marks were in the system even before Wayfarer and OPR (the Ingress-only equivalent before Wayfarer) pre-2017, and only surged in popularity towards the end of 2020.

    That being said, submitters need to make the effort to properly nominate a survey mark. It is very easy to tell whether someone has copied and pasted their description from the wayspot showcase and their supporting information is a paltry "eligible under rules" which means absolutely nothing to the reviewer. Or the photo is poor and not even centred like the majority of survey mark nominations in Cherrybrook. You should ask the survey mark submitter from Canterbury for guidance. Or Auburn for that case (despite their supporting statement is often N/A, they do a pretty good job everywhere else).

    Lastly, someone told me not submit in the area and let the local community who play day in/day out do that instead. I did a few around Burwood and Homebush some months back but now I won't do anymore and leave the Inner West community to try to keep submitting survey marks and usually fail. All for your taking now, kapeesh?

  • exculcator-INGexculcator-ING Posts: 67 ✭✭✭

    Do you forget what it's like to be low level? When I was a tadpole, there were two portals that I simply couldn't hope to ****, because they had resonators in inaccessible places (e.g in a pond), and the centres similarly were not ultrastrikeable with low level USs. If I tried to attack those two portals, I would run out of standard bursters long before the last resonators went down, and that was without anybody recharging them.

    Correctly positioned POIs in contrast can be taken down by a low level agent, with enough persistence, precisely because they can be ultrastruck.

    Of course, after a few months of playing, I had access to level 8 bursters, and didn't give a ****'s about exactly which resonator was at which position, and whether a lone portal was shielded or not. But I haven't forgotten was it was like to be level 4, and how level 4 weapons were such a massive increase over level 3 ones...

    Now, back to the topic at hand.

    I live in Japan, and in Japan, trig points are stone blocks, about 20 cm square; I have submitted very few, as they are almost impossible to get passed, even the "1st order" ones, of which there are very few. (In all of Osaka prefecture, population about 8 million, there is a grand total of... four. This means the great majority of cities in the prefecture have not a single 1st-order trig point). See here: http://kansekimanpo3.okunohosomichi.net/ten_index_osaka.html

    Counting all trig points, 1st through 4th order, Osaka prefecture has 403. Given their rarity, you might think they would make good wayfarer candidates, and people do indeed go trig point bagging, so they could well fit the "exploration" category even if there was no "geodetic survey marker" category. But as rather undistinguished stone blocks, they don't have much appeal in the eyes of the standard reviewer. After all, the only inscription they bear is the order of the marker (1st, 2nd, etc.), and a rather small square stone block, surrounded by leaves and other forest detritus (as they usually are) isn't exactly photogenic.

    I would never dream of submitting mere surveying markers, even if they were "eligible", give these, at least here, are usually just concrete blocks about 8 cm square, with no visible features about them at all, other than an orientation cross and the name "Osaka" on the side (some are better - being partially in plastic, with the lat-long coordinates printed on them; but the only time I've used these is as supporting photos for a portal candidate that just happened to have one of these nearby - to show the candidate is actually at this position).

    But who wants their game littered with these things - they occur every hundred metres, in every direction. The game would be nothing but survey markers if these were acceptable.

    When people talk about NSW markers, they have to bear in mind what goes for NSW goes for the rest of the world. In NZ, where I used to live, trig stations were great big things you could climb on, and were easily photographable. Great candidates you might think! But the form of a trig point shouldn't really matter, since it's all about function with these things. And if a Japanese trig point isn't "acceptable" I don't think an NZ one should be either - and nice versa.

    Personally I'd like to see trig points accepted - if of a certain standard. In population-dense Japan, one could make an argument for any trig point (i.e. all 403 of the ones in Osaka Prefecture). But you couldn't have that density in New Zealand; not least because trig *stations* in NZ are simply not as densely placed as that, but also because such a density would look too great in comparison to all the other waypoints (not a problem in Osaka, which has what - maybe 100000 portals?). A 403:100000 ratio would hardly be overkill, but it would look a bit different if the ratio was 403 to 10000, and obviously so if it was 403:1000.

  • AeriTheBOFH-PGOAeriTheBOFH-PGO Posts: 234 ✭✭✭

    My favourite from the past few days was the one in the middle of Kingsway.

    There was also old **** from Turramurra, who probably spammed the system anyway because the one I reviewed a couple of days ago was a dupe of one already in the system, which I had no idea how it got through in the first place because it was literally on the road.

    Maybe one of these days I'll actively try to get some removed for pedestrian access and PRP.

Sign In or Register to comment.