Breenzy-ING Posts: 18 ✭✭✭
So, can we please go back and remove these from the network now? They are a blight.
My old thread from last year would be a good starting point for the clean up: https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/20560/survey-marks-gregory-hills-area-nse
While I can appreciate that there is a subsection of the community in NSW that wants these removed wholesale, I personally would find it extremely disappointing to have these removed rather than grandfathered after people (including myself) spent years begging Niantic for any kind of clarification on these only to be told by Wayfarer's own Twitter account just over three months ago to "make sure to add what they mean and why they’re important in the description" after I showed a suburb full of them and a nomination for one embedded in a residential curb that was accepted.
I had not nominated a single state survey mark before that Twitter clarification, but after it, I poured countless hours into submitting them with detailed descriptions, quality photos, and accurate positioning.
It's my own fault for committing so much time to my local marks, but such a sudden change of tone on these in such a short amount of time kind of stings a bit and makes the clarification I received previously feel like it was kind of given in bad faith.
They can just remain as grandfathered scars on the network for as long as Turkey's atrocities exist for all I care. They do not meet any removal criteria (maybe pedestrian access) but have we ever seen a successful report?
The majority of survey mark submitters place zero detail to the detail of their survey mark nominations. They are often:
Wose, reviewing your survey mark nominations was extremely refreshing to see a huge level of detail and effort into these marks. Everyone else, not so much. I would be glad if this would mean the end of the terrible survey mark nominations and back to regular Wayfarer programming. However, this is further from the truth because a criteria clarification (that will be buried in time) on the forums will not ever hit reviewers and they will continue to review to their own agenda, leaving no repose for the continuing flux of survey mark nominations I review.
Breenzy, why is this so important to you? Why do you strive for quality of the portal network/Wayfarer database? Or better yet, why are you so fixated on removing such things 750km away?
A Twitter post by the social media team does not count as tacit approval for the portals. The criteria was never updated for accepting them.
They are incredibly poor portals and should be removed.
If that's the case, the Wayfarer team needs to clarify that the official Niantic Wayfarer Twitter account is not a trustworthy source of information. I know you've already read it, but for those playing at home, the entire Tweet was:
"A lot of really important advancements in land surveying and #geomatics used globally came from Australia, which has a very large industry for it. The mapping science is fascinating too! Make sure to add what they mean and why they’re important in the description."
It wasn't just a generic support reply "**** **** TrAiNeR, mAkE sUrE yOu ReAd ThE cRiTeRiA!" coming from NianticSupport. Instead, it was a very unambiguous reply given the context and tweets before it. To me, it was more than enough to indicate whoever wrote it had a deep enough understanding of the situation to have an opinion on the matter and enough authority to express it on behalf of the Wayfarer team.
"why they’re important in the description."
Cool, so none of them are important, because all highly generic. Glad we could clear that up.
So, basically, survey markers are allowed, if they hit the criteria of being interesting/have a story.
I 100% agree with this.
The 20c coin markers which I have posted above, are then ruled out entirely pretty much, they are all located almost exclusively on a roadside kerb in suburbia outside someone's house.
That tweet doesn't provide any insight that "whoever wrote it had a deep enough understanding of the situation".
It doesn't say that they are inelegible, instead they only claimed that you should explain why they are important, without providing any further insight.
And that's the usual situation with Wayfarer, it's full of nuances and they don't want to provide black and white answers, it's always up to each reviewer to give their personal opinion, even in the newest criteria clarification they start claiming that even when something is eligible it doesn't mean that it must be approved.
Again, the context of the Twitter clarification was specifically in relation to a survey mark that wasn't just in front of a house but also embedded in the corner of a private driveway.
I'm not arguing that these should be acceptable moving forward. My point is that just 3 months ago when presented with a large amount of (arguably) worst-case evidence, someone on the Niantic Wayfarer team (at the time) decided that rather than responding with a "NO" or a "we'll look into it" decided to just say "Make sure to add what they mean and why they’re important in the description."
I'm not really talking about future approvals here, as per OP, I'm referring more to the removal of existing survey marks that have already been approved by the community and via appeal.
They won't be removed if they don't fit removal criteria (PRP, K12, safe pedestrian access)
They are unsafe and must be removed. They are located on road gutters. It's incredibly disappointing that Niantic has not actioned on these immediately. They are not safe for pedestrians.
This varies by location. In my local area almost all of the survey marks at located on either the raised curb or sidewalk.
As to there's a footpath ('sidewalk' for Americans) nearby argument ... These markers are distinguished by tiny little identifier on the survey marker you need to stick your head out into the street to confirm the number. These are not a power pole on the verge. They a tiny marks on the actual road. The curb is road.
@WoodWose-PGO I know we get totally shafted in the suburbs for poi density but they are not safe.
Niantic need to help us out in the suburbs but this is not the way at all.
I appreciate that might be the case in certain locations, but it definitely isn't always that way. I feel like the saftey aspect is an important and related, albeit separate discussion. It really depends on where you are.
I believe these are dangerous for pedestrians ... hey kids these tiny little spots are important enough to have a name in a game you play. So what if they are located on the road ... come look!
ok that one is a safe location.
Yet would recommend removal so a clear line can be made - survey markers in suburban contexts in Australia are just not of value to pass. Australian governments love a sign ... if a survey marker in the suburbs had historical or other cultural value it would have a sign.
These are just not significant enough ... and it's awful that you put so much work in and now feel it challenged. I too get pretty precious about pois that I believe should be included. My first poi contribution is regularly rubbished by others and I took me some years to understand it shouldn't have been submitted let alone pass OPR.
There are other nations besides Australia that have survey markers as waypoints. Please don't ruin it for the rest of us.
How is it ruining it for you? Survey markers are fabulous poi when they are in places were they count. Even in Australia we have a long tradition of accepting survey markers where they actually mean something to walkers in the area.
Been watching some amazing footage from Taiwan mountain trails. Survey markers on tiny little metal plates .... super important to pedestrian navigation.... Amazing poi candidates ... Though perhaps locals might have rules like we only accept survey markers on trails that are accessible upto a certain difficulty level for safety.
Context matters @jokeinsurance-PGO it always has mattered Having rules like "all survey markers count" when the world is full of different cultures doesn't make sense. A better "rule" is to question whether people use the survey marker in a significant cultural way. Navigation in wilderness is valid reason.
No one uses a survey marker for navigation in the Australian suburban context .. we have street signs for that ... And they are not considered valid poi... The navigation in wilderness is however regarded as significant.
Here's a smorgasbord of supporting statements of survey marks currently submitted by existing wayfinders in a round of reviewing just now (before I got the "All done for now." message)
There is zero relent. I don't approve these just because for the sake of approving them due to eligibility, but the majority of these people above (except for Lidcombe because I know who submitted that one) are serial spammers or Pokestop beggars and will NEVER STOP until they are approved. So I begrudgingly give middling marks (except to Cherrybrook, the worst of them all). Most of their descriptions are copypastas of supporting statements or copied from other sources. Barely anyone of these people have any idea what a survey mark actually is and are generally just copying and pasting all their responses with very little to no variation or copied straight from Wikipedia.
"Poke your head out onto a residential street" and get hit by a car, who even does that?! I've walked along several paths passing by many survey marks and have never seen anyone díe or get injured. How about we remove some of those painted poles in Crestmead? I can effectively argue that many of these are placed at the end of private property onto a street which makes it a potentially dangerous location which may encourage trespassing or create a dangerous traffic situation. But I won't because that's not a problem that I'm making a big deal of.
What is it with agents (particularly) from Queensland being so strongly against a type of nomination that is clearly a New South Wales thing? Queensland has their own share of survey marks nominations and existing wayspots too. Kiĺl those off first, and then maybe you can look into New South Wales?
I've never really seen a positive post about survey marks on these forums lest a tidal wave of disagrees flows in, but others (particularly the Global Wayfarers Facebook and even some local Pokemon GO chats) are highly more supportive bar some extremely vocal dissenters.
As you are a quality submitter and reviewer and local .. I would of course value your opinion for your area.
Yet would still not pass any suburbian survey marker unless outstanding evidence to prove their cultural value ....
I can value your perspective but come to a different conclusion.
A dig at the Logan poles though? ((((Which by the way are a cursed resistance strong hold. And wish they would disappear because of my extreme jealously for such delicious density and straigth spines for easy MU ))))
The 'Logan poles' are painted artwork. They are painted on poles that are located on the verge and are at comfortable chest height. Designed and installed by the council for the beautification of the streets not the same a tidgy tiny mark of no note within the context of the suburban environment.
We have dodgy stuff in Queensland too and you are very welcome to make recommendations for our state
yet the Logan poles are like art on traffic signal boxes ...not sure you can make a case for removal on the grounds of pedestrian safety or PRP.
Tell me location of rubbish survey markers in Queensland and would support their removal.
I say that these are generic and abundent marks and should not be allowed as they are used for servayers and if thesed are blocked or broken or missing people can get fined for this. the rule is unique and when they are everywher it is not unique.