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

  • thedigid-PGOthedigid-PGO Posts: 2 ✭✭

    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.

  • 26thDoctor-PGO26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 4,972 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.

  • Furvious-PGOFurvious-PGO Posts: 2 ✭✭

    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.


  • 26thDoctor-PGO26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 4,972 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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?

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

    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).

  • grendelwulf-INGgrendelwulf-ING Posts: 301 ✭✭✭✭

    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.

  • CarolFigueiraRS-PGOCarolFigueiraRS-PGO Posts: 381 Ambassador

    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.

  • PepeFuentez-PGOPepeFuentez-PGO Posts: 31 ✭✭

    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.

  • Naddie701-PGONaddie701-PGO Posts: 6 ✭✭

    @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.

Sign In or Register to comment.