Possible. My long routes don’t pass many POI as there’s only one on a particular part of it, so I’m keen to see what happens there. Based on my previous ones, I’ll let you know by about May.
Bonus +1 for history. I could only offer the story of The Laird and Dog pub
According to legend, before there was a bridge, a sturdy local girl, called Jenny, would wade across the river carrying travellers on her back, including a laird and his dog!
My dictionary tells me "jenny (n) - a female donkey or ****". But "sturdy local girl", you just can't beat the local vernacular. That should be a route!
I’m up to 30 accepted and 1 accepted then rejected because it was bugged and 1 rejected twice at a country club. The bugged one never ended and went on forever after published and should have been around the minimum🥴. Had the whole community messaging me for a week about it and told them just 1* it and I did as well. Probably 75% of mine are instantly approved. I only have 3 under review and just submitted a couple days ago. Plus I think I’m really close to breaking the code of getting them instantly approved.
Thanks to this option, I've deleted all my pending submissions. As Niantic thinks my submissions are too dangerous or encroaching on private property, I have no desire to contribute to it any more.
I know Routes are a PGO thing but we have a problem for all waypoints that might be on the path of a route
PGO is rejecting a number of routes for Dangerous position or inaccessibility post successful publication. Some of which are very well used with hundreds of interactions. IF not more depending on where placed.
Why is this an issue for wayfarers? It means despite this usage and interaction with the waypoints one, some or all the Waypoints on a route are at risk of being in a dangerous position and or inaccessible.
Do I now need to report these waypoints as PGO don't tell anyone where, what or if any Waypoints are impacted by the dangerous/inaccessible rating? Of course NO Waypoint may be impacted - as there maybe a danger in the journey. I accepted that. But the risk now exists.
Because I don't want anyone to be at risk playing any games I feel I need to go to each Waypoint and report it for potentially being dangerous or inaccessible. Is Niantic placing players at risk by not addressing all the waypoints on the journey? That actually there is a lack of safe pedestrian access.
Remember this is not about PGO v ING. But rather not knowing how to react to Waypoints now potentially being a place that a Niantic game has ruled has risk.
Some of you are now going. Don't be silly. I hear you. But some of these routes are wholly in parks with no roads. No ponds. Nothing. Some of these routes are around town centres past multiple waypoints.
These are the very waypoints that we have all been accessing for years. Probably on the same paths we have used for years to get to the waypoints. But now we are told no you should not be accessing them......
Seriously should this be considered more of a wayfarer thing than just a PGO issue.
I think it's more that routes have come to a bit of a halt?
I'm not sure if Niantic want to do anything with them or are just happy to have another feature that only just functions over taking it anywhere interesting.
Probs. I open up and wonder what I will see next removed
We know Niantic is appalling at comms. So no expectations. But if you going to tell me a route is inaccessible or dangrous by implication the risk is that one or more waypoints is a risk / inaccessible. I want to know which ones.
I also love the fact that the help team tell you to create the route again if you think the description is wrong having just removed it for being dangerous. At the same time as having a review queue that I would guess is growing rather quickly the more people they enable access to...
@3CasualPokeGame-PGO this is the only Routes thread on Wayfarer as Routes is a PGO specific thing
The length of time a route can be in review is variable. But there are reports of months.
Many are reporting that unless AI approved nearly all routes are going into the review queue and have done for several weeks now.
But we have no emperical evidence.
AI approved routes tend to get accepted in minutes and are walkable straight away. While near identical routes go to queue. So no one knows why or how or even what the
I was walking a route. And as you know I have noted the red flag not being there.
Since then I have done a few more without the red flag at the end and walked far enough for route thing red saying completed did I want to finish. Well that worked. So for now looks like I don't have to pause and restart if red flag missing - which was a bonus.
I did another walk. Forget to end it. Walked some where else and the phone crashed. Came back. Route was no longer blue and I would have to walk it again. My fault for ordering a coffee when I first completed the walk.
complete Segue. My submit later option button is missing. I have to upload immediately. I was like what the S23. Not the case on my S9.
Back to routes. Review them Niantic. Just review them please
Today one of my routes which has been active since the summer was removed, the rejection reason was "inaccessible area". This route has been walked hundreds of times by the community. It was a walk around the town centre following a pavement the entire way, passing many historical buildings. I can only assume some kind of reporting abuse. No apparent way to appeal this, I'm incredibly annoyed.
Very common issue. I did report as suspected abuse. As I think we should. Unless we make noise no one at PGO will listen.
I have dangerous and inaccessible as excuses for very well used routes. One in park, one around the town centre and one along a world famous trail walked thousands of times a day.
All PGO team do is say resubmit if you think safe and they will raise with team. But it is key we make noise. I also used the PGO contact us feedback forms. More noise the better
My other concern is that PGO is telling me using their app is dangerous and inaccessible. Will not tell me where. I cannot identify the Niantic Waypoints at risk to report them. But that is just me being difficult :-)
I believe that when someone reports a route for dangrous and inaccessible they should have to provide a description, a main photo and supporting photo showing danger/inaccessibily in context with surroundings. Photos must be taken at the time of reporting and not uploaded. There is noise that people are reporting them for no rewards, z cells or they want their routes in etc etc
As we have to go to the effort to create and then recreate routes so too should those reporting routes for danger and inaccessibility.
And when reporting. PGO should put a message that says incorrect reporting can be considered abuse of the system and a breach of the terms of use.
Not even monthly here currently. I have spoken to someone else and they have been waiting since late August as well for queued items to be processed. Same area as me.
that said new routes are popping up so who knows why some and not others.
Comments
Oh dang. Mine only has 3.
They may take that into account not the amount of pubs but how many poi a route directly passes?
+1 on your auto accept score for every poi, -1 for certain tags etc etc
Possible. My long routes don’t pass many POI as there’s only one on a particular part of it, so I’m keen to see what happens there. Based on my previous ones, I’ll let you know by about May.
Well your inn's were a bit modern - mine dated from 1409 😉
Bonus +1 for history. I could only offer the story of The Laird and Dog pub
According to legend, before there was a bridge, a sturdy local girl, called Jenny, would wade across the river carrying travellers on her back, including a laird and his dog!
Who doesn't want that as a route!
My dictionary tells me "jenny (n) - a female donkey or ****". But "sturdy local girl", you just can't beat the local vernacular. That should be a route!
A route that I had submitted early/mid July just got accepted yesterday. I'm lucky that I even noticed since I had given up checking on them.
My total route record (since beta opened up back in June) stands at:
That's not many, but it's gratifying to see those routes being used by others in the community.
I’m up to 30 accepted and 1 accepted then rejected because it was bugged and 1 rejected twice at a country club. The bugged one never ended and went on forever after published and should have been around the minimum🥴. Had the whole community messaging me for a week about it and told them just 1* it and I did as well. Probably 75% of mine are instantly approved. I only have 3 under review and just submitted a couple days ago. Plus I think I’m really close to breaking the code of getting them instantly approved.
Strong women in Scotland :)
If you figure it out don't forget to inform Niantic how it functions.
Looks like I can choose to delete any Routes that are under review now too.
Thanks to this option, I've deleted all my pending submissions. As Niantic thinks my submissions are too dangerous or encroaching on private property, I have no desire to contribute to it any more.
I know Routes are a PGO thing but we have a problem for all waypoints that might be on the path of a route
PGO is rejecting a number of routes for Dangerous position or inaccessibility post successful publication. Some of which are very well used with hundreds of interactions. IF not more depending on where placed.
Why is this an issue for wayfarers? It means despite this usage and interaction with the waypoints one, some or all the Waypoints on a route are at risk of being in a dangerous position and or inaccessible.
Do I now need to report these waypoints as PGO don't tell anyone where, what or if any Waypoints are impacted by the dangerous/inaccessible rating? Of course NO Waypoint may be impacted - as there maybe a danger in the journey. I accepted that. But the risk now exists.
Because I don't want anyone to be at risk playing any games I feel I need to go to each Waypoint and report it for potentially being dangerous or inaccessible. Is Niantic placing players at risk by not addressing all the waypoints on the journey? That actually there is a lack of safe pedestrian access.
Remember this is not about PGO v ING. But rather not knowing how to react to Waypoints now potentially being a place that a Niantic game has ruled has risk.
Some of you are now going. Don't be silly. I hear you. But some of these routes are wholly in parks with no roads. No ponds. Nothing. Some of these routes are around town centres past multiple waypoints.
These are the very waypoints that we have all been accessing for years. Probably on the same paths we have used for years to get to the waypoints. But now we are told no you should not be accessing them......
Seriously should this be considered more of a wayfarer thing than just a PGO issue.
Well I stopped this conversation flat!
I think it's more that routes have come to a bit of a halt?
I'm not sure if Niantic want to do anything with them or are just happy to have another feature that only just functions over taking it anywhere interesting.
Probs. I open up and wonder what I will see next removed
We know Niantic is appalling at comms. So no expectations. But if you going to tell me a route is inaccessible or dangrous by implication the risk is that one or more waypoints is a risk / inaccessible. I want to know which ones.
Just because - well - hey safety first
I also love the fact that the help team tell you to create the route again if you think the description is wrong having just removed it for being dangerous. At the same time as having a review queue that I would guess is growing rather quickly the more people they enable access to...
@3CasualPokeGame-PGO this is the only Routes thread on Wayfarer as Routes is a PGO specific thing
The length of time a route can be in review is variable. But there are reports of months.
Many are reporting that unless AI approved nearly all routes are going into the review queue and have done for several weeks now.
But we have no emperical evidence.
AI approved routes tend to get accepted in minutes and are walkable straight away. While near identical routes go to queue. So no one knows why or how or even what the
How long yours been in queue?
Those SW London parks where mine have been removed are wildly dangerous....
Yes it is all the squirrels.
We have drop bears. Awful things. Moved into city parks too. Shame making all those routes dangerous and inaccessible.
I was walking a route. And as you know I have noted the red flag not being there.
Since then I have done a few more without the red flag at the end and walked far enough for route thing red saying completed did I want to finish. Well that worked. So for now looks like I don't have to pause and restart if red flag missing - which was a bonus.
I did another walk. Forget to end it. Walked some where else and the phone crashed. Came back. Route was no longer blue and I would have to walk it again. My fault for ordering a coffee when I first completed the walk.
complete Segue. My submit later option button is missing. I have to upload immediately. I was like what the S23. Not the case on my S9.
Back to routes. Review them Niantic. Just review them please
Still waiting on my 22nd June one to be approved/rejected.
Will it hit four months?
Yes :/
Apart from auto accepts has anyone had anything accepted after 26/09?
Today one of my routes which has been active since the summer was removed, the rejection reason was "inaccessible area". This route has been walked hundreds of times by the community. It was a walk around the town centre following a pavement the entire way, passing many historical buildings. I can only assume some kind of reporting abuse. No apparent way to appeal this, I'm incredibly annoyed.
You’re correct in there being no way to Appeal a removed Route currently. You would have to resubmit it.
Yes it happens, with human reviews.
@PkmnTrainerJ-ING
This concept could open a can of abuse.
Do you know what the date was?
No. I have had no reviews accepted since about the 28/08. Everything else has been AI.
With the queue steadily growing.
Very common issue. I did report as suspected abuse. As I think we should. Unless we make noise no one at PGO will listen.
I have dangerous and inaccessible as excuses for very well used routes. One in park, one around the town centre and one along a world famous trail walked thousands of times a day.
All PGO team do is say resubmit if you think safe and they will raise with team. But it is key we make noise. I also used the PGO contact us feedback forms. More noise the better
My other concern is that PGO is telling me using their app is dangerous and inaccessible. Will not tell me where. I cannot identify the Niantic Waypoints at risk to report them. But that is just me being difficult :-)
I believe that when someone reports a route for dangrous and inaccessible they should have to provide a description, a main photo and supporting photo showing danger/inaccessibily in context with surroundings. Photos must be taken at the time of reporting and not uploaded. There is noise that people are reporting them for no rewards, z cells or they want their routes in etc etc
As we have to go to the effort to create and then recreate routes so too should those reporting routes for danger and inaccessibility.
And when reporting. PGO should put a message that says incorrect reporting can be considered abuse of the system and a breach of the terms of use.
7 on the 26th here.
I guess we'll find out in the next batch if they are doing them fortnightly or monthly.
Not even monthly here currently. I have spoken to someone else and they have been waiting since late August as well for queued items to be processed. Same area as me.
that said new routes are popping up so who knows why some and not others.