Wayfarer 3.1 Release Notes: New Criteria + Darkmode
NianticCasey-ING
Posts: 538Niantic › admin
Hello Explorers!
Welcome to Wayfarer 3.1. As noted in the Path to 2021 post, and our recent AMAs, we’ve been working on a big Criteria update, which we’re super excited to introduce to you. With this update, the Help pages for Ingress and Pokemon GO have been superseded and consolidated into a single place here.
Unlike previous clarifications and small-scale changes, this is a complete overhaul of the criteria and overrides any previous AMA response or clarification here in the forum. The new criteria should be considered the new source of truth.
Here’s are the details:
NEW EVALUATION CRITERIA
As we reflected on all our discussions and debates around the criteria over the past year, we realized we were losing focus on what was really important to us as a community of Explorers. Niantic’s mission is to build products that encourage us to explore the world, exercise and be social with each other, so we’ve reframed the criteria around that.
As Explorers, we need to consider the cultural context and local meaning of the Wayspot first. This moves us away from discriminating against nominations categorically, and asking us to think more holistically about what we consider as interesting and important to our local communities (note that Wayspots for adult-oriented services like liquor stores and gun shops will still not be allowed).
We know this will introduce more possibilities within categories like ‘generic businesses’, potentially benefiting smaller communities that may only have a generic, but still locally important, business. Or for seemingly common objects like benches or phone booths, which if out of context/rare within it’s landscape, are actually pretty cool objects to explore.
There are four core sections to the way we’ve reframed the Wayfarer Criteria, keep in mind that all four of these are important to consider when evaluating nominations:
- Eligibility Criteria: For a nomination to be eligible for consideration by the community, it has to justifiably support Niantic’s mission - be a great place to explore the world, a great place to exercise or a great place to be social. Eligibility does not mean an automatic acceptance. It only means it’s good to be considered by the community.
- Acceptance Criteria: Acceptance criteria stipulate specific requirements that the nomination must meet (in whole) in order to be accepted (whether a new Wayspot or Wayspot edit). All acceptance criteria must be met.
- Rejection Criteria: Rejection criteria stipulate what the nomination must not meet (in whole), including abuse reasons. If even one of the rejection criteria is met, the nomination must be rejected. These criteria focus on maintaining the quality of the Wayspots.
- Content Guidelines: This section provides additional guidance on how to craft and evaluate nominations (Wayspots and edits). We encourage all submitters to use the supporting photo and text regularly and often to strengthen the case of why a nomination is eligible and meets all acceptance and eligibility criteria.
And just a final note that personal judgement in the review process is never going to be eliminated, because it’s not the intent of the criteria to tell you what’s interesting and important to your community. So be comfortable with a bit of grey area!
We will be proactively reviewing previously rejected nominations that may have met the updated criteria. In the meantime, if you have any nominations you would like to reconsider under the new criteria, please update the title, description and supporting text and resubmit.
ALSO NEW: DARKMODE
Woop! We’re introducing darkmode! This will automagically be applied if your browser is already set to display in darkmode, and we’ve provided a toggle for you to control darkmode in Wayfarer specifically. We hope this brings some small comfort to those who struggle visually with bright screens, want to save battery life, or simply prefer a darker way of life :)
Still to come:
- Updates to the Showcase
- Updates to the onboarding and training experience
- Updating the Review page interface
- More bug quashing (keep the reports coming!)
- NEW: Releasing some fun videos to shed light into how Niantics review Wayspots
- NEW: Dropping the submitter level in Pokemon GO from Level 40 to Level 38 before the end of the year (this matches the current Wayfarer review Levels).
Finally, as always, thank you so much for your commitment to Wayfarer and Niantic’s mission. We really hope you feel like this refresh to the criteria makes it more straightforward to both nominate and review Wayspots and empowers you to share interesting, local spots with your community of players!
If you haven’t submitted your questions or feature requests for the upcoming November AMA, please do so here. Stay safe!
Comments
Finally I can just show Everyone the guidelines for fakes/other abusive POIs and do not have to write a text everytime. Good Job, really apreciate it.
I have an anthropology degree, and I think "cultural context" is a uselessly vague phrase here.
Even though I'm happy that the criteria are now at one place, I find it weird that it's dropped during the question phase of an AMA. Some of the most upvoted questions in the November AMA could be referring to criteria that are now obsolete.
That Criteria page will help me + I missed dark mode alot. Appreciate the update.
Thanks for highlighting this, I specifically called out that we would not be addressing any criteria questions when kicking off the AMA for this very reason. Additionally, there's a new thread to add questions specifically about this new criteria here.
Wow, you're completely right. To be honest, I forgot that probably as soon as I read it.
Sorry for the confusion.
Must be safe and publicly accessible by pedestrians (indoor or outdoor)
This seems different from previous clarifications. Is this now an explicit requirement?
Unlike previous clarifications and small-scale changes, this is a complete overhaul of the criteria and overrides any previous AMA response or clarification here in the forum. The new criteria should be considered the new source of truth
@NianticCasey-ING, does this supersede your own clarifications? Should we take clarifications you and other Niantic staff provide in the forum as criteria?
NEW: Dropping the submitter level in Pokemon GO from Level 40 to Level 38 before the end of the year (this matches the current Wayfarer review Levels).
It seems that someone was in a rush yesterday 😂
Is it possible to also have a Dark Mode for the forums?
[...] With this update, the Help pages for Ingress and Pokemon GO have been superseded and consolidated into a single place here.
@NianticCasey-ING does this include the "Help" page that is still active on the Wayfarer website?
I didn't saw anything about religious things for example churches chapels in the new guidelines or did i misread it?
I'd suggest adding a button/link at the bottom of each section of the new criteria page, as it's easy to miss the other sections after scrolling down the "Eligibilty Criteria" section. Especially on mobile, the other sections are only indicated by a small drop down menu at the top of the page. And even on desktop, the section navigation menu scrolls off screen.
Under "A Great Place for Exploration" they included "Public places of worship".
Aún tiene errores y no deja enviar las revisiones deberían checar eso niantic
Have I missed something? I can't find any informative pages about the criteria? Just the Eligibility Criteria, Acceptance Criteria and Rejection Criteria pages (which aren't even linked in this release note announcement???)
This is the supposed "big criteria update"??? There's nothing there, it's less useful than what it used to be. This is pathetic. Where are the specific details of past criteria? Where are the promised list of acceptable examples (such as for footbridges)? Instead all we get is a short rewrite of the pages that are just purely text. This could have been done in about 30 minutes and we have waited for how many months?
Why not just create a Wiki page, with ALL the previous guidelines and clarifications (including those that are only found on the forums) and allow the users to curate it and mould it? That way when something is needing proper clarification, Niantic can step in - however, given how things have been, not sure Niantic are even capable of understanding the guidelines when things are always contradicted anyway.
"Influencing reviewers" is now listed as a rejection criteria, but there's no option to reject nominations on that point when reviewing.
Dark mode? Whoop-de-doo. It's a simple CSS change, nothing special.
This update is really underwhelming.
The new criteria pages are still vague as hell. I get that things are subjective but c'mon.
It feels like one step forward, two steps back if all the previous AMAs are scrapped.
Quick clarification @NianticCasey-ING. Does this mean that we should ignore all the clarifications made in the previous AMAs, or just the clarifications made that conflict with the new page?
Agree with GearGlider-PGO and oscarc1-ING.
Having a very vauge interpretation of the guidelines can open up the doors for a lot of abuse within the Wayfarer system. Please make a Wiki! It will be best guide you (Niantic) can give us. It's the easiest way to cut the rubbish submissions, which in turn- make reviewing easier. The better the quality of the submissions, the easier it is to review them.....the better it is to play our favourite Niantic games!
Please. Help us, help you.
After reviewing the criteria page and the way spot eligibility section, I only have one question so far, do parks/trails/gardens/forests/docks/natural features/etc still need official signage?
With these new guidelines, if an existing wayspot meets one or more rejection criteria is that a valid consideration for a removal appeal or are they still protected by some grandfather clause?
We know this will introduce more possibilities within categories like ‘generic businesses’, potentially benefiting smaller communities that may only have a generic, but still locally important, business. Or for seemingly common objects like benches or phone booths, which if out of context/rare within it’s landscape, are actually pretty cool objects to explore.
Yeah, that's probably not going to happen, because the the reviewing will still be dominated by voters from larger communities, and they're not going to take a townie's word that a bench is "out of context."
Open for all abus... 😒
Please how nice it is to go and see a phone booth or a bench among the benches...
I feel a lot of information has disappeared? But since swimming pools are no longer explicitely excluded, I see it as being eligible, since they promote sports and are a gathering place.
I do not agree about some examples such as "Popular restaurant", "gaming store" or "favourite coffee shop" as this opens the door to submitting any business, especially since you also state they could be generic. (Also, "coffee shop" means something else in the Netherlands, just saying).
Overall I see a lot of ways this will lead to more confusion and arguments among the community and do not think for 1 moment this will improve the quality of submissions. I'm a Pokémon Go player myself, but I'm sad to say the majority of submitters only submit with the mentality "More Pokéstops and Gyms, no matter if it's interesting".
Abusive submitters are definitely not being handled, as we keep reporting fakes from the same town, who just appear live again after a week or two.
I really appreciate that all criteria are at one place. Some criteria are now clear for me, e.g. hiking trails AND biking trails are mentioned.
I also appreciate that criteria is easier. An athletic field is Ok, it is now up to me if a swimming pool is athletic or recreational. And a trail is a trail...
I do hope that the list will be updated if issues are discussed/answered.
I am a little sceptic about thecriteria being too open to interpretation. I just recall an "empty spot of nothing" nomination that was claimed to be a meeting point. But maybe this is in acceptance criteria "identifiable place".
I think I will stop reviewing for a day or two and memorize the rules.
It would be great if the reviewing clusters would match the new cluster eg. Eligibility/Acceptance/.....
I totally agree with your idea. This Niantic's news is just vague. It just means NOTHING.
A great place to be social with others
Please could you precise the point about drinking fountain / water fountain / bubbler. According to last AMA this kind of object do not follow the criteria except they are uniques ; unique in the sens of one different from all the other fountains, not the only in a park or garden.
Most of them are mass produced and the name "fountain" allows poor wayspots.
Still no specific way to report fake submissions?
That behavior should have a specific option that end in restrictions to submitter account.
Maybe now since the criteria have changed and the onboarding is going to be reworked give people who failed the onboarding test more than two years ago a new chance to try it?
Nice, clear set of criteria. I think the nomination process should be changed so that the submitter has to
This would help submitters avoid unacceptable nominations and reduce work for reviewers - reducing frustration on both sides.
Nice to see Niantic starting to gather all the current criteria into one place, but it needs a bit of work and is all a little "top level" and vague in places. What's missing are the explicit clarifications about topics that have been provided over recent months. If, as stated "Unlike previous clarifications and small-scale changes, this is a complete overhaul of the criteria and overrides any previous AMA response or clarification here in the forum. The new criteria should be considered the new source of truth".
Fair enough, but where to we go to confirm things like "A trail marker must have the trail name on it" or has all of this been junked?
I can see a lot of arguing if this is so. Bring back or confirm the detail please, you know what the community can be like arguing over "voter fraud" and pushing their own interpretation of the guidelines.
The category "Community gardens" seems likely to be stretched to the extreme by submitters wanting more stops or get a couch portal. At what point should reviewers draw the line between a famous formal community garden and 'a few square feet of grass that is maintained by the local authorities'?
Similarly, 'Plaza' is open to argument at the moment. Where should reviewers draw the line between a large historic town square and 'just a few paving slabs'?