It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
Yeah pretty much ... I think, I might be misunderstanding what you mean by offside lol. Basically, pavement or not doesn't matter, I'd say if the cycle route is along a road, that's not ok as it doesn't meet the exploration side (unless visually distinct and different from the usual level of signs as was pointed out on my example earlier) that Gifford said, but if its a path or trail, even a dirt path, then its something that would encourage people to go out of their normal route to see, so thats when it would be acceptable. The only grey area I saw was my actual example where they intersected, ignoring the distinct bit. But even then, the more I think of it, it would be similar to how people say entrance/exit points of trails are what you are submitting so even then mine would be acceptable
It's all about secure access, what Niantic does not want are generic signs. Since you shouldn't or shouldn't play while cycling anyway, this question does not arise. But you can approach this wayspot without any problems, ergo it's a POI.
Thats not what Giffard said though, he said it's to encourage the exploration side too, a standard sign next to a road won't do that, at no point did he say safety had anything to do with it
he actually said that a sign just saying BIKE LANE with a bike on it isn’t acceptable. But to me if the sign has an arrow and destinations with a distance on it plus a picture of a bike and a route or trail name these are all acceptable as long as it’s in a safe place for pedestrians and cyclists.
The question Giffard was answering was: How do we determine what's generic?
Whether a sign is located in the woods, or next to a road, does not make it any more or less generic. As @RobWaudby-ING said, Giffard explained that a sign for a bike lane is generic, and a sign for a bike trail is not.
A sign for a bike line, is a sign that tells a cyclist where their place on the road is. It doesn't help you explore or encourage anyone to cover more of a trail.
A sign for a bike trail, helps a cyclist to continue on the trail. It does help you explore and encourages you to cover more of the trail. And it doesn't matter if that sign is located at a road that is also used by cars, or if it is a separate path where no cars are allowed. Of course it still needs safe pedestrian access, but just being located at a road is not a reason for rejection. One can just as must explore in the city as in a forest.
Actually, his words were "if you have a sign board for a bike lane" so you are partly right, but i would also take it to mean the bike trial going along the road. Especially when the general meaning was exploring new routes, hence why im saying tails and not roads, as roads aren't really exploring, but trails would be
Very well put, 100% what @NianticGiffard said.
In that case cities and town centres are worth exploring.
Didn't say the couldn't be. I can't honestly think of any bike route that goes through Glasgow City center that'd next to a road, im pretty sure the national cycle route is instead along the river Clyde, so I'd be fine with that
At the end of the day, I trying to keep it fair, cause remember, if we just start submitting them all, you will have more people wanting them to stop and say its saturating the map or whatever. I'm not against these, ive already looked out 2 near me to submit (third one I need to go and check it's been replaced, Google maps suggests it had been taken down by vandals) and then I can get someone to do the example I posted earlier
We have one route that goes through the historic town centre and runs along the coast for 100 miles. The north Norfolk coast cycleway.
ive been out looking around for the good ones to sub.
This is my take on @NianticGiffard post.
Theses are acceptable
NOT SURE ON THESE
I would pretty much agree with that selection.
I also would say that the selection looks good.
I always tend to not accept things that are normal street signs that are in the catalogue.
you posted the one that we have in germany Bike / Mother and Child.
I strongly advise to anyone "please do not hold back your cycle and hiking-trail contributions!"
DO submit them, DO push them out so people learn whats the difference between a "generic street sign" and a Cycling/Hiking-Trail sign
I'm glad my selection looks good. I tried to give good examples of what I think @NianticGiffard meant in his reply.
I hope this helps the community a lot.
The only one i wouldnt consider acceptable thats on your list of acceptable is the very first example.
Simple reason being yes its a trail marker sign. But i don’t see a separate trail from the actual road itself. (If there is the picture doesnt show it really) So the bike would actually have to be in a “bike lane” on the road so to speak. Everything else in guidelines would say that doesn’t meet access criteria.
The rest are great examples though :)
Good luck informing the wayfarer users as im fairly sure they will still reject and be oblivious to this.
Just had this one rejected
These two are generic signs / signpost - not eligible.
But surely it’s not just about those on bikes. I often follow parts of NCN routes on foot as great exploration routes away from cars. Sustrans has always been clear that these routes are about general environmentally sustainable journeys.
So should it matter if there is a specific Lane for bikes as long as there is as per normal, safe pedestrian access?
The first one is definitely now acceptable the second is a maybe but more to the yes side of maybe. As per @NianticGiffard post on this thread.
NCN routes are for cyclists and pedestrians and offer some great exploration and exercise at the same time.
most of the signs will now be acceptable as per @NianticGiffard post on this thread.
the only signs I’m not 100% with is the stickers but they serve the same purpose as the main signs.
This would be a 5* from me. It will take time to get people to see that all markers are acceptable but we will get there.
Stop making things up, generic signposts are not acceptable and majority of these markers are generic and mass produced and aren’t interesting. Despite NianticGifford not agreeing with you it hasn’t stopped you from saying that Niantic have ok’d the most basic generic signs
@NianticGiffard has already already said bike lane signs are not acceptable as in a sign that just says BIKE LANE as they are generic. Any marker that leaders you down a path or route exploring is acceptable.
This is a signpost - not a "trail marker". Not eligible.
You my friend need to go have a look how many different trail or route markers there really are. They come in all different shapes and sizes.
on another note it would be nice if @NianticGiffard would have a look at the pictures on the sub to confirm if they are acceptable or not.
I know trail markers come in many shapes and sizes, the distinguishing thing is they have a trail name on them. This differentiates them from things like road signs or signposts, which are just general direction markers. Two different things.
They don't need a name on them anymore. It can just be a small marker with a picture that's now acceptable
These are now acceptable as per @NianticGiffard
Apparently, the reviewing community still think uninteresting mass produced blue generic cycleway signs are still uninteresting mass produced blue generic cycleway signs and are rejecting them according to the rejection critera:
The object is mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting.
I didn’t take Giffard’s wording as saying these were acceptable. Not sure how you’ve misconstrued that.