so disappointed,to many legit submissions rejected
Flippppppi-PGO
Posts: 2 ✭✭
Hi.
I have made so much effort in submitting legit and really cool and helpful pokestops but most of them where turned down for all the wrong reasons.
I never submitted **** or fake stops, i was always honest and carefull to meet all the criterias.
It such an disappointment to see most of my submissions turned down for untrue reasons.
I will stop now submitting, it completely discouraging that so many submissions are rejected.
What a wast of time.
Completely frustrated.
Comments
Could you show us what kind of nominations you made and the reasons why they were rejected?
Please attach a screenshot of what you've nominated.
Finding a way to get your application approved is much more constructive than complaining about the reviewers.
Actually he has rights to blame the reviewers, which currently still dominated by the bots who reject everything in Germany.
But yes, how about showing the nominations along with their rejection reasons here? Without more detail those bench, footbridge and telecommunication tower are simply ineligible.
In the case of the Footbridge, Niantic indicated they are *explicitly* accepted per the most recent guidance. You might consider reviewing the acceptance criteria before pronouncing things with such certainty.
That's not strictly true either is it? My interpretation of the latest guidelines is that footbridges can be eligible if they are part of a trail. Their eligibility is based on them being a fixed anchor point along a trail like a physical trail marker. They are not necessarily eligible in their own right just for being a footbridge.
How many foot bridges aren't linked to a trail of some sort?
Sure, maybe some exist, but the vast majority are linked to a trail at least in the Denver area where I live. I don't think I've ever seen a footbridge that isn't connected to a trail.
This who is from an avid cyclist who rides hundreds of miles a month over years and years. I've been on pretty much every public cycling trail in the city and surrounding area at one point or another (these double as walking trails most of the time). I also ride mountain bikes and have seen every inch of most MTB trail systems in the Denver area.
All overpasses or foot Bridges are eligible and all of them are being accepted as waypoints. I'm an avid new reviewer and have seen about 20 or 30 of them and every single one is connected to a path.
So yes, they're probably our scenarios where something wouldn't meet the criteria, but your statement was a blanket one and not nuanced.
Should we reject a decorative footbridge that is in a private residences front yard? Absolutely. But the criteria for rejecting that has more to do with the private residents that it does with the feature type.
There are tons of footbridges that aren't part of a trail. Have you never seen a spot along the sidewalk where they have to put in a footbridge to pass over a wetland, a stream, or a ditch? There are many footbridges like that in my area. Unless they're actually part of a trail, I rate them poorly, as they don't meet any of the acceptance criteria (a sidewalk is not the same thing as a trail--though a sidewalk could be part of a trail).
@Flippppppi-PGO What criteria do you think those meet? Exercise, Socialize, or Explore?
1) Why is this bench a destination? Does it have an awesome view? Or, does a specific group meet there on a schedule?
2) Is that bridge part of a trail, for the Exercise criteria?
3) Looks undecided... is it art in and of itself - worthy to Explore? Do people gather at those letters to Socialize? I can't see how they'd possibly encourage Exercise.
4) Looks like a communications tower. I can't even make up a reason it would be Exercise, Socialize, or Explore.
5) If that's a trail marker, it qualifies under Exercise.