Are Wayspot Candidates Required to Have a Sign? Niantic Thinks So

Last night, a good friend (PoGO username BuzzGUN) had an appeal rejected for a historic cold war missile site. The rejection statement said, "Thanks for the appeal, Explorer! An image of a signboard representing the Wayspot walking path will increase the chances of this nomination getting approved." See the screenshot below:

I believe this is eligible under "A Great Place for Exploration," due to it being a historical and relevant point of interest. This rejection is confusing for a couple reasons. First, the statement doesn't explain how not having a sign makes an object ineligible; it just says that having a sign will "increase the changes." What's more confusing is the fact that nowhere in the criteria pages does it say that Wayspots are required to have a sign. To me it seems that Niantic has rejected this appeal for a reason that is not even related to the acceptance or rejection criteria. This is far from the only example I've seen of an appeal rejected for not having a sign. I had a uniquely designed walking path rejected for similar reasons recently:

Another player, @SailorLynx13-PGO, had an appeal rejected for a signless park. This is especially confusing, because in the Criteria Challenge from last year, Niantic specifically called out signless parks as being eligible: "Parks are definitely eligible Wayspot nominations, even ones without official name stones or signs indicating it as a park but are clearly still parks. (NianticTintino)"

I'm not posting this to debate the eligibility of these three examples; I just want to ask whether they were rejected for the correct reasons. Not having a sign doesn't make something not a place to explore, exercise, or socialize. What do you think?

@NianticTintino-ING @NianThib @NianticAaron


Sign In or Register to comment.