Invalid Wayspot Appeal: Giant Concrete Tree Stump

neonninja-INGneonninja-ING Posts: 3 ✭✭
edited April 2021 in [Archive] Appeals

Title of the Wayspot: Giant Concrete Tree Stump

Location: -36.976169,174.769533

City: Auckland

Country: New Zealand

Screenshot of rejection email:

Photos to support claim:

Additional information:

This portal is on private property. It is impossible to get to it without trespassing. As such it should be removed. These photos were taken from the gate, which is 227 meters away from the portal.

Post edited by NianticGiffard on
Tagged:

Comments

  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 3,934 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2020

    It's not private residential property, so it doesn't meet that removal criteria. Also, there is no requirement for Wayspots to be accessible to all players or at all times. Restricted and limited access Wayspots are allowed. As Andrew Krug use to say, see it as an opportunity to make new friends. Finally, Wayspots are allowed on private property (in fact most Wayspots are) so long as it is not the property of a single-family residence, school, or child care center.

  • kiwijamo-INGkiwijamo-ING Posts: 1 ✭✭

    I can understand wayspots being located on private property *open to the public*. However, in this case, this wayspot is definitely not open to the public at any time. Only people on authorised business (e.g. employees and the like on company business) are permitted to access this location—under Health and Safety regulations as noted on the photos attached to this appeal. Entering this location is breaking the law unless you have permission. I understand several Ingress players have accessed this location (given it has been captured, and other players have deployed resonators) and I would wager none of them have done so legally.

    Andrew Krug's statement makes no sense in this context. Given the legal status of accessing this wayspot, I don't see how I would be making friends. I certainty wouldn't be making friends with the owner of the land I would suspect...

  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 3,934 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There was never a requirement for Wayspots to be "open to the public". They have to be accessible to someone, even if that someone is an employee. And Krug's statement was very apt to these situations, become friends with one of the employees and recruits them for your team.

  • neonninja-INGneonninja-ING Posts: 3 ✭✭

    I would perhaps use the term "attractive nuisance" - as it seems certain unscrupulous agents have trespassed to use this portal for some perceived advantage against the other team who aren't willing to trespass too.

  • Grogyan-INGGrogyan-ING Posts: 34 ✭✭✭

    A wayspot that is is on private property, and sign posted against trespassing, should be considered for removal.

  • Appeal Denied - Thanks for the appeal, Agent. We took another look at the Portal in question and decided that it does not meet our criteria for removal at this time.

  • Grogyan-INGGrogyan-ING Posts: 34 ✭✭✭

    @NianticGiffard this suggests that Niantic are OK with trespassing on private property

  • oMrSinisterXo-INGoMrSinisterXo-ING Posts: 44 ✭✭

    @neonninja-ING @Grogyan-ING Just give and take... The world isn't discrete black and white.


    However, if you insist to put up a case, try intel map with satellite image on. Repackage your case as "No safe access for pedestrian". Maybe it might just catch some attention.


    Btw, based on my past encounters, refrain from telling admin what to do. Just present your case neutrally.


    Hope that helps 😉

This discussion has been closed.