Wayspot nominations defaced or tagged with graffiti?
More than once now, in my wanderings I've come across what would otherwise be a perfect 5* nomination. Trail marker, historic/informative plaque, and the like. It's clearly visible on the street view, and/or the trail is clearly visible on Google maps.
And the only issue with the nomination is that somebody has taken a can of spraypaint to it. Obviously I cannot clean the plaque/sign myself, that just risks damaging it even further.
And of course the single rejection reason comes back as, "... Photo is low quality", regardless of the actual quality of the photo. The reviewers are, in fact, making a judgement that it's the graffiti that is "low quality", not my photo.
Generally the nomination will pass with 1-2 more attempts, but my record for a trail marker at the trail's entrance was 7. And no, the city didn't help at all with any cleanup of the sign.
Other than griping and biting the bullet to resubmit (the next time I'm within 25km of the location again, sigh), is this actually the way Niantic intends? Does the "subjective ugliness" of graffiti on an otherwise-valid nomination override the nomination's validity?
I think the answer is graffiti shouldn't impact whether a nomination is passed or not, just as taking a mediocre picture in dull weather shouldn't, but the reality is a nice looking object with a really nice photo always stands a better chance of passing.
Basically my position is, when rating the photo, it's not really in the wayfarer reviewer's purview either to be an "art critic" or to pass judgment on a municipality's "beautification" budget. For "photo quality" you're only judging whether the photo is clear and accurately represents the POI.
I've had this same issue. A park welcome sign with a grafitti tag on it required I think 4 submissions? The acceptance only came after we took some alcohol and scouring pads to it because it was always rejected for bad picture. The tag didn't even cover the park name - it was on one side so the sign was still easy to read. So yes, can confirm that people hate graffiti.
If I'm reviewing I wouldn't reject something eligible for graffiti or algae or anything like that as long as I can tell what it is.
i don’t think it should have an impact.
it should be about the waypoint and not the state that it is in. Often in spite of an information sign having graffiti when you are there in person you can still read it, something that is not apparent on a photo.
The photo should be clear.
I always have a cloth in my bag to give a board quick clean, it helps make a clearer picture.