Nomination process is a joke
Nominated 3 stops a year and a half ago and all three just got denied for petty and ridiculous reasons. Not going to spend anymore time or money on a game when cant get any pokestops in this area. Pokestops in rural areas should be encouraged not held to the highest levels of scrutiny as if this is New York Central Park. Moderators shouldn't have this much power. What a joke. Bye Niantic.
Comments
You could share the Wayspots you’ve nominated if you want feedback? They may not meet criteria or might meet rejection criteria. Hard to say without images or information.
Not going to spend anymore time on it. There's obviously a culture here that will say it doesn't meet the criteria regardless of other points of view. I've seen enough pokestops to know that many were approved that don't meet the criteria. However, in my view its better that they exist than not, as it gives people an ability to actually play the game.
Why the process is a joke:
1) No indications of how long the approval process will take, no ETA provided, no details of how the voting process works or how many people have looked at it.
2) Waiting 19 months for a decision only to go to the back of the line to start the process over again is not something I am going to do.
3) Should have the ability to resubmit with edits, submit alternatives, or collaborate with moderators on improvements to the submission to get it approved.
2) Criteria favors destinations(cities, tourist spots, etc) rather than rural areas. Again it's better to get people playing in rural areas than to be stingy with the rules and getting hung up in technicalities.
3) Wayfarer is not even explained in the app nomination process. You only learn about it through word of mouth.
4) Rejection criteria is not well documented or explained in the app instructions. The app does explain that there are things that will get you rejected but Wayfarer has much more specific instructions that you only learn about if you know what Wayfarer is. Had people known that up front, there would be more quality submissions.
I agree with you that the process is not well documented. Niantic did implement an appeals process for rejected submissions.
The criteria DO favor urban areas but that is because the purpose of Niantic games is to get people out to explore interesting places and urban areas just naturally have more of those. Reviewers are instructed to be more generous in low-density areas but more generous doesn't mean that street signs, Taco Bell drive-thrus, trees, and gas stations are going to be accepted. (I've reviewed all of those things and worse.)
You're actually right about a lot of points, and even Niantic would agree with some of them. But it's the system we're stuck with for now, and while it is frustrating for all of us, we do with it what we can.
Yes, Wayspots are favored in urban or metro areas. I happen to live in one. I also have nominated in small towns across the Midwest with one of my prides being a Montana hamlet that I took from 0 Wayspots to several dozen, with more on the way in a few weeks.
You do have to suspect reviewers who see your nominations to not be familiar with the area. That's why it's important to be clear how you believe it meets eligibility. Hot take that some of my cohorts will disagree with, but more things can be eligible than we typically give credit for.
Your comments land with people contributors who usually find success (why else would we have stuck around) and Niantic mods are not near as active as they should be to see these types of comments. So, to be frank, while you're complaining is valid it's falling mostly on deaf ears. If you would like to, you could share a general area you're at and we can help look around at things you may have missed. A lot of us have been at this for years.
That’s a lot of typing for not spending any more time on this.
I would echo @Gendgi-PGO's points.
I'd also add that my submissions have improved by asking people for advice, info.
If I'm submitting something it's because I think it's worth submitting whether that's because of its location, aesthetic, history etc. I also found out by asking that the submission I thought was great when seen through someone else's eyes had a flaw, could have been improved with a bit of tweaking, I'd made a stupid error that could easily be remedied.
Give it a go if you like.
Hello,
i just finished reading this whole post, and I would have to agree that the nomination process is a joke. I have submitted 5 nominations and only 1 was approved. Of the others, 3 were rejected for non legitimate reasons. I did appeal 1 of those and now am unable to appeal any more. 1 of these was rejected for location accuracy, and I can assure you that the POI was within 5 feet of the actual structure. (Pictures attached) The last of the 5 nominations was my first and I never got any emails or confirmations on it. It just appeared in my list as rejected.
It might be helpful to post all your submissions otherwise it's hard to tell why you were rejected.
What do you think makes the pictured one eligible?
Irrespective of whether the pictured one is or isn't eligible was it visible on maps/street view?
If this is in the middle a field, most likely reviewers could not see it on street view or satellite view and therefore could not confirm location. Is this at the wildlife refuge? Either way, wildlife houses are generally not considered acceptable by many reviewers, the idea being that the structure is there for the benefit of wildlife and humans shouldn't be hanging around other than passing by on the trail. Also, it's not really clear that it is "a great place to explore" (definitely not a great place to exercise or socialize).
I reviewed your bat house @Furvious-PGO and I voted to reject it. Bat houses and bird houses in wildlife areas are not places you want to attract more people; you want to give the bats and birds their own space, and increased human incursion in their area disrupts them. There’s not an easy rejection reason to choose for that; I think I selected “other rejection criteria.” I’m sorry I didn’t have a better means of communicating this to you at the time of rejection; I used the available tools the best that I could.
I have reviewed literally hundreds of nominations in and around the Horicon area; someone in your area is well-versed on Wayfarer; I recommend you find that person and discuss ideas with them.
Right. Attracting people to a bat house would ruin the bat house. Same for a birdhouse, butterfly house, or any other kind of habitat for living things.
Maybe the "Live Animal" rejection reason is closest? It's rejected so gamers won't chase away live animals that someone is trying to attract and help.
That's not even eligible. I have gotten nat houses accepted, but in every instance an educational plaque about identifying native species was also present.
I think some might be eligible but I read bat house and only think that is dangerous and someone might catch something walking around that place.
I also try and nominate Waypoints when I am traveling through small towns.
I know children as young as 3 years old that play Pokemon Go. It's hard to explain to them why some areas arent "interesting enough" to play in because online reviewers take their "job" more seriously than a brain surgeon (and more serious than Niantic's guidelines at that).
It's for sure a broken system filled with broken people and broken business. I'm honestly pretty surprised with the response you got from this post. Many people are usually very quick to share insults, assume you're wrong, put their hand over their heart and recite a post they read 3 years ago, and then provide their own personal opinions on waypoint expectations that are well beyond anything Niantic has ever shared. Hopefully those trends are beginning to change.
The only routes are to just keep trying and hope for the best, or stop contributing.
I'd be likely to reject any bat house, Purple Martin house, or other nesting structure erected as a mitigation against humankind's rampant destruction of nesting features in more natural setting. These structures are not great places to explore, exercise, or be social: they're for animals, not humans, and should be left unmolested if that was the intent. Some housing/nesting structures have explanatory signs a respectful distance away: those are fine. Some Martin houses are custom-made and highly decorative, meant for both animal use and human enjoyment: those are fine. But not everything needs to have a human use, after all. Bat populations have struggled of late, and Purple Martins and other insect-eating birds are similarly threatened with habitat loss - they shouldn't suffer from human interaction as well. There are Bluebird boxes along some of our roadways, erected by the county and maintained by an army of volunteers - disturbing these nesting structures is an actual crime. Why is a bat box a potential candidate? I like to see them, sure, but mostly because I know that bats eat bugs which then cannot bite me. I don't need to spin a stop or hack a portal to get value from a bat box.
TL,DR Version: Wayspots should generally be things intended to be enjoyed by humans.
@X0bai-PGO The person you’re mentioning from Horicon is @Brycekrispie98-PGO and he has built up a couple cities, Horicon, **** Dam, Mayville and Oshkosh to name a few. If @thedigid-PGO wants to reach out, he is one of the elected officials for the city of Horicon too. Just google Horicon WI common council and you will find his contact info.