Survey Marks - Gregory Hills Area NSE

Title: NSW Survey Marks

Locations: -34.024265,150.770693 (a several hundred metre radius from this location)

City: Gregory Hills NSW

Country: Australia

HELP here are hundreds of tiny 3cm survey marks submitted in this area that will take a week to report them all. This is mass abuse of the Wayfarer system and anyone submitting and then allowing them need to be banned as they are clearly not acceptable, purple markers indicate how bad this problem is.



Tagged:

Comments

  • Starbright1016-INGStarbright1016-ING Posts: 1 ✭✭

    Wow and wow to the approvers.

  • BaltiCalling-INGBaltiCalling-ING Posts: 296 ✭✭✭✭

    While it's debatable whether or not these met initial acceptance criteria, I'm not sure what removal criteria they meet?

  • oscarc1-INGoscarc1-ING Posts: 334 ✭✭✭✭✭

    This probably would have been better in the General Discussions forum, which more often brings up mass-abuse and gets results there.

    Here is an example of one I just got to review: Primary photo / supporting photo

    The tiny disk is on the driving road, no pedestrian access, located in the middle of a residential area. Majority would be like this.

    If you search for "State survey mark" using the mission editor, you'll see over 6000 results and 99% of them around Sydney! The rest of Australia are sick of them, but for some reason the Sydney lot accept them so they can get more Pokestops. This topic comes up every other week, so it would be nice to see Niantic take some action on these.


  • WayfarerMSE-PGOWayfarerMSE-PGO Posts: 1,172 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Unfortunately there are far too many people who do not understand the criteria and actually think that these suggestions are valid. I totally agree with you, this is **** and should definitely be removed from the system! That doesn't invite you to discover and explore.

  • Jimbobwai-INGJimbobwai-ING Posts: 28 ✭✭✭

    Surely a perfect example of when to 1 star for visual uniqueness.


    Sadly I know of a few online groups who believe that these are great pokestops/portals because more is better. They will claim that Niantic has okayed these, but they have never provided any proof of this.

  • itamernz-INGitamernz-ING Posts: 51 ✭✭✭

    Exactly!!!

    I've seen the argument that they're unique because they have a number stamped on them - unfortunately, that number is as meaningless as a memorial bench plaque that says "Rob loved this place".

    Australia has an abundance of parks, churches and scenic lookouts. They don't need to hustle for waypoints.

  • iDionZ-PGOiDionZ-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    I submitted some artwork/mural/metal etching twice in my town and got rejected. So tried the survey marker directly under it and accepted first go.


    A very small % of people have made a big deal of them not being Eligble. If they weren’t they wouldn’t of got accepted in the first place. Sydney is literally the only place thay get accepted but they’re a good 50/50 chance now. I’ve submitted some and got them accepted in my time reviewing.

    the most niantic will ever do is make them Ineligble they won’t ban players or remove survey markers because currently they’re doing nothing wrong and you know it. And banning someone because there opinion isdifferent isn’t a good move. Plus it’s not like niantic don’t know about them the topic is regularly put up here and 1/10 submissions I review currently are survey markers.

  • WayfarerMSE-PGOWayfarerMSE-PGO Posts: 1,172 ✭✭✭✭✭

    "If they weren’t they wouldn’t of got accepted in the first place."

    You are aware that there are people who make mistakes and are simply lazy and interpret the rules as they see fit, don't you? Just because it's accepted doesn't mean it's acceptable. Fake wayspots are also permanently accepted, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable too. What kind of logic is that!

  • iDionZ-PGOiDionZ-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    There was a post by someone at niantic saying these. We’re eligble and they even sent an example s the dude at niantic said yes. I don’t think Anyone submitting them would care if they stop being eligble, because niantic don’t delete stops that were originally eligble.

  • We took another look at the reported locations and decided that the Wayspots do not meet our criteria for removal at this time. However, due to insufficient evidence, we’re unable to take action on the other Wayspot which you reported of not having pedestrian access. If you have the wayspot location and title, please resubmit with additional information and we’ll take another look.

Sign In or Register to comment.