It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
2 Slightly different topics in my post.
The main point was a comparison between the Picnic Tables in my Picnic Area being accepted by Niantic and the Picnic Table he used in his View one not both on appeals. Both "Generic" items. But contextually, the tables I photoed with perm grills became a picnic area and the AREA was eligible as a gather point.
The same context applies to benches. If they are on a trail or create a rest stop in a trail. They shouldn't be viewed as coal but rather as good exercise/explore. They serve the same purpose as a trail marker. I've seen POIs on trail that are nothing more than a Yellow Triangle on a sign on a tree or on a post. The bench contextually serves the same purpose. Same thing applies to scenic views. Sometimes a view is explore worthy. But it still needs an anchor point. I'm arguing that a bench in that CONTEXT could serve as an anchor.
So in short, 99% of benches aren't eligible directly, but instead of calling them "Coal" reviewers should look and see if the bench serves as an anchor for an Area/Context that is eligible. Along trails + views being the most obvious. That's the community shift I am arguing for.
I tagged you because I you said "Almost" and I had a picture of the 1% of cases where the bench is directly eligible itself.
Of all the problems within Wayfarer, the number one problem is the extreme amount of ineligible junk submitted. By all accounts, well over half of all nominations (My experience suggest over 2/3rds at the least) are short of eligibility in every way. It’s this junk that creates long wait times, alienates reviewers, enables rejection bots, teaches reviewers to look for a rejection with each nomination, and generally brings down the wayfarer experience for every single user.
Every. Single. User.
These generic benches the OP is talking about are going to get rejected. It doesn’t matter that they’re on a trail - which isn’t a criteria exception for benches that Niantic has offered up - it matters that they’re generic benches and they’re going to get rejected.
Stop with the imaginary criteria nuances. Not submitting these benches is in everyone’s best interest.
Wrong. From the November 2020 Wayfarer AMA:
you'd want to direct players to a safe location somewhere along that trail that's easy to find and safe to access. This would apply to trail markers, survey markers, trail signs, etc.
A bench on a trail is a safe location that is easy to find and safe to access.
It is rejecting eligible things that creates long wait times and brings down the Wayfarer experience for everyone. These are not coal. They are at least worth a fair review.
Wrong yourself. That does not include benches. Otherwise they would have said “benches” instead of referring to forms of signage three times. Unless and until Niantic makes a bench-on-a-trail exemption, the fair review benches deserve is immediate rejection, and the greater good is to not submit them at all.
Incorrect rejections would be greatly reduced if reviewers didn’t have to reject the overwhelming majority of garbage in the system. Keep the system clean, keep reviewers engaged. Clog it with generic benches, get rejection bots. Sowing bad submissions only reaps more of the bad rejections you resent so much.
You know it’s the weekend when…….
the temperature starts to rise in discussions about trails 🙄
time to chill a little.
That's very different from my experience, I see very few coal submissions that are just random objects and far more that are just businesses where they didn't put any effort in to make it clear why it's interesting. Your bad experience isn't universal but I'm sure people in areas where it's like that complain more to make it seem like it is.
Do you know what "etc." means? As I said "A bench on a trail is a safe location that is easy to find and safe to access.".
Similar sentence that I made up: "Religious buildings are eligible, this includes churches, chapels, cathedrals, etc." And you are arguing that mosques are not eligible because the buildings listed are all Christian.
Hrrmmm I don't simply think of Survey Markers as a type of "signage". To me it's vastly different than a trail marker and trail sign. Implying that the Etc is meant more extensively than you are arguing.
And most importantly, this forum is Criteria Clarification, meaning having discussion and trying to convince reviewers and even for Niantic to weigh in is the point.
My argument is that Benches/Memorial Benches are not acceptible directly** but make acceptable anchor points for trails, scenic views, and natural features that fit explore/exercise criteria but need man-made anchor points.
@NianticGiffard is welcome to step in and settle it.
**99% of time bench isn't directly eligible. Rare decorative benches or famous person memorial benches might be directly eligible as Explore worthy**