Sign does meet criteria. Help me nominate better
RubyandSamsMama-PGO Posts: 44 ✭✭
Hi everyone. Hope you are all having a great day. So, I keep submitting a duck crossing sign that I know is eligible. People out walking and bicycling pass it on the regular and people see we have ducks and will go feed them. It is worth exploring the area for. Its safely accessible from more than one vantage point. I've had it denied 4 times now and every time I make a point to mention the reasons is been denied, I get a new reason for rejection. I've had it called unsafe, temporary display and the most recent reason "fake nomination" I feel so dejected. What can I do to improve this so it gets accepted?
I think the temporary rejection is from it being cable tied on which you can see in the pic.
Although it's fine to mention Go in the support I would personally not as some people take umbrage with anyone doing that.
I'm afraid you are mistaken. This is a (slightly humorous) traffic sign warning people not to run over the ducks. It does not meet any of the acceptance criteria.
If there were a sign that said "Clewiston Duck Pond," that could be eligible as representing a place to explore, or perhaps a place to be social.
If it were an educational sign about duck habitats or the history of ducks in Clewiston, that could be eligible as a place to explore.
If it were an original art piece depicting the local ducks, that could be eligible as a place to explore.
It is none of those things, though. It's just a traffic sign. Any exploration value it has by pointing people to the nearby duck pond is incidental to its primary function as a traffic sign.
I mean you have typed a lot of fancy words. Fancy doesn't make any of it true. Plenty of signs get approved every day. It's safe don't tell me otherwise because a lot of pokestops and gyms are the same distance from the road. It's a visually unique sign that lets people know to slow down for the ducks. People pass by it on the daily. Just because you talk a lot doesn't make you right guy.
I mean you have typed a lot of fancy words. Fancy doesn't make any of it true.
That's what the reviewers thought when they saw your nomination.
Lol I wasn't talking to you. Was talking to the other guy. You are actually helpful. Good come back though.
I apologize, I had assumed you wanted honest feedback. I will take my fancy words elsewhere.
The supplementary photo will be a better post if it shows where the object is.
Can I see it on street view?
The judges may be reviewing the same post multiple times.
If the judges find you annoying, they may treat you badly.
It would be better to give the judges a cooldown after a short period of time.
I also posted the surrounding area photo as a screen shot. Thanks for your input, I'll wait a bit before renominating.
This is an actual PokeStop in the game that I saw in a surrounding area of something I voted on. Let me get the people who voted this in 🤣
OK so this sign exists. And people go by there. And you need moar Pokestopz. But none of those is an acceptance criteria.
Is it something you'd drive over specifically to explore? Does it promote human exercise? Do people meet there to socialize? Please re-read this: https://wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/new/criteria/eligibility
Not eligible in any way. The existence of equally-bad POIs does not justify the inclusion of more bad POIs.
Explore is such a big category, and these POIS are not meant to be judged only to "Adult Standards". One of the ways I personally judge explore is would my kid playing pokemon say "Hey lets go see that" when we are taking a walk and he clicks on the POI in the distance. This I think he would.
It's pretty funny sign, and pretty dang unique that shapes humor. I'd say it fits explore. Heck, I am always looking for a bit of humor in the world and clicking on this would make me chuckle.
@Cowyn2016-PGO It's Niantic's database. You can't just make up your own criteria. Read Niantic's criteria here https://wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/new/criteria/eligibility
Sure have. Bolded parts I think it fits, and Crossed Off Parts I don't think it does. Is it perfect. Nope. But the funny part of stuff like a "Place you love to venture out to" is very different when your thinking of taking a child then when you are thinking of your own likes . And venture out to on a walk is very different than venture out to as a specific trip to the place.
A place you love to venture out to a
destinationor a placemark of local interest and i mportanceand which makes our communities unique and shapes its identity. Somewhere or something that tells the unique story about a place, i ts history, its cultural meaning, or teaches us about the community we live in.
And it's not like those criteria aren't open for interpretation. I didn't for example see anyone (including you) quote the same link in this thread https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/38614/nomination-rejected#latest when listed in the criteria are specifically
There is very little overall consistency as it is, even in Niantics own reviews/rulings... as it really is a system that is in the eye of the reviewer. I tend to think the sign is pretty unique, and explore worthy, you dont. But look at this thread I did earlir. https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/35389/the-three-that-got-away-3#latest got approved on 2nd try. That much different? I don't think so by the letter of the paragraph above.
Yes you can. Niantic have said on many occasions the criteria is not either/or and to apply your own judgement. There is no set in stone standard of what is correct or incorrect.
Not everything is acceptable but everything is eligible unless it is unsafe or could cause a hazard. It's up to the reviewer to convince that the criteria fit.
Even when you look at Criteria. There is so so much undefined.
Like look at the first sentence "A place you love to venture out to" what does Niantic mean by that standard?
a) A place you plan a specific visit too by car?
b) A place you'd plan a vacation too?
c) A place you'd take a walk to?
d) a place you'd take an out of town friend too?
Whose the one venturing or interested or loves the POI?
a) A local adult point of view?
b) an out-of-towner's adult point of view?
c) an childs point of view?
Or is it "All of the above" and up to reviewers to apply if they think any of those fit? I think this spot is humorous enough that I would vote for it. That's not me ignoring Niantic's criteria thats me thinking critically about it. Explore depends a ton on how you want to read and apply it.
I thank you so much for this input and point of view. Imo some people have become rather snobbish when it comes to what does and does not fit criteria. I mean for instance in my opinion pools, club houses etcetera in gated communities should not be approved because the general public may not have access to them, approving them for me is like saying here guys have your own special waypoints other people could get trespassed for trying to interact act with. I see them approved all the time though. I've had it explained to me why they are ok to approve. People say it doesn't matter if everyone has access to them, as long as it's multiple families. Ok they they found a loop hole to get private property in the game 🤣 then deny a visually unique duck crossing sign that people do stop and look at and go near to feed and take a look at ducks, explaining all kinds of reasons they made up in their own heads as to why the sign doesn't meet their criteria. The same as the reasons socialites in gated communities made up reasons to approve their exclusive message boards, pools, club houses and entrance signs. Seems legit 🤣
I think the sign would have a slightly higher chance of being approved if it was bolted into the pole rather than just being zip tied. Also I would suggest taking a Google 360 of the area so people can see it.
The Wayfarer in me dislikes everything about this nomination, from the cable ties to the bent sign (which makes it look like paper or cardboard) to the unofficial nature of it (looks like just anybody put it up, meaning just anybody could take it down) to the unforgivable lack of any supporting location information whatsoever. It doesn’t look like a great place to explore or exercise or socialize, it looks like an instant 1* rejection.
The Pokemon Trainer in me is amused. If I got this as a postcard in a gift, I’d probably pin it.
Its not about being "Snobbish", no need to insult people.
Reality is there are a lot of ways to look at things, and people are looking at them their own way, even you.
For me, I could see voting for it as its amusing, and some place I'd specifically walk with my kid hence explore worthy) but it's not a slam dunk and I could see people voting against it.
However @X0bai-PGO pointed out some details I missed which makes me doubt the signs permenance. And others have different ways of judging explore.
Try again and you might get a better draw. Sometimes the EXACT same submission can "just fail" and then retry and get "just pass"
I don't think you have an accurate understanding of the term "private property." Private property is not part of any criteria. Malls, restaurants, skating rinks, movie theaters, theme parks, etc. are all "private property" because some person or company other than the government owns them. The restriction is on single family homes. Amenities in neighborhoods, even those behind gates, are not on single family home property. They are open to the people who live in that neighborhood and their guests. Similarly, you might need to be a paying customer in a theme park to interact with the POI behind those gates. And the owners of a shopping mall or movie theater can determine the hours or any other standards for allowing you inside (wearing shoes, for example).
You answered your query when you typed out the title for this thread - "Sign does meet criteria". This is correct - it should be rejected every time.
"Help me nominate better": Find something else to nominate.