September AMA - Discussion
NianticTintino Posts: 878Niantic › admin
edited June 2022 in General Discussion
Super excited to announce our next AMA taking place September 30, 2021! For new explorers, this is the time for you to ask your most pressing questions about Wayfarer and vote on other questions you want answered too. Once voting is done, 15 questions will be selected and sent to our team for responses.
With that being said, please drop your questions as comments in this thread by September 22, after which you'll have 5 days of voting to determine the top questions for selection.
Thanks again for your excitement and I look forward to all of the questions!
Post edited by NianticTintino on
"More PokéStops are a good thing!" "What's the harm in accepting a few things here and there if they help everyone out?" "It's my little free library and I love people stopping by!"
These comments frequently pop up in Twitter, Reddit, or Facebook groups and there is a large sentiment to accept things that have frequently been clarified (albeit on the Wayforum only [waste stations, little free pantries]) as ineligible. What kind of response do you have to combat this well intended but counterproductive behavior?
What considerations should be taken when reviewing candidates near emergency services? Many memorials and gathering locations exist on or near fire station or hospital grounds that can be safely approached on foot via sidewalk with 0 potential of blocking emergency responders. However, it would be possible that a driver could stop in the entrance and end up blocking such services.
Because the mantra is consistently "adventures on foot," should only foot traffic be considered with respect to blocking services or should car traffic be considered, as well?
"Don't upgrade it, upgrades are more likely to be rejected" is an all-too-common sentiment shared across multiple communities. This leads to "I am not reviewing right now because I don't want upgrades." What can Niantic do to help this encourage reviewing and discourage "unfair" rejections?
Safe pedestrian access
Niantic has always maintained an "adventures on foot" acceptance criteria - that is to say, you must be able to reach a Wayspot by foot rather than exclusively by swimming, cycling, or motor vehicle. However, "outdated" Ingress AMA & Wayforum clarifications have added that places like golf courses or tidal pools do not have safe pedestrian access [presumably with respect to situational awareness]. Can you clarify in the published guidelines what it means to have safe pedestrian access?
What does the wayfarer team see an an acceptable amount of time to wait for a new Wayspot to be approved or Rejected?
Are you seeing the current Wayfarer Process meet those expected turnaround times? If not, what are you trying to speed up these wait times?
Does the wayfarer team have any kind of expectations or visions for the "lifetime" of a reviewer's activity?
Is the average reviewer to keep at it long term?
Are the badge tiers viewed as a sort of typical ceiling on most people's involvement in terms of nomination count?
How many total nominations and at what frequency does the team expect or estimate the average person will send in?
Why is it set up that Good/Great reviewers receive the majority of their reviews from outside their reviewing range, while Poor/Fair get mostly from their own area? Wouldn't it make more sense for Good/Great reviewers to get reviews from their own area at a higher priority while Poor/Fair get them from farther away in order to encourage good reviewing and help combat Wayfarer Abusers who may review poorly to get more reviews from their area?
Over the last few months, people have reported nominations vanishing from their Wayfarer management screen, which Niantic clarifies as meaning "internal reveiw." How should we handle when seemingly high quality nominations we, as reviewers, agree are eligible being denied for "." rejection reasons from Niantic?
How should we feel about the increase in hyper generic businesses like McDonald's and an AutoZone store following the same trend, except these are being deemed eligible from Niantic?
There is a well known problem with the Wayfarer Rating for new Wayfinders where most will be rated "poor" after the first few reviews, only for it to improve when these reviews finish evaluating. This discourages a lot of new reviewers because they think they are just doing a bad job. Is the Wayfarer team aware of this problem and will it be addressed the next tome wayfarer is updated?
With the criteria refresh, do multiple disc golf markers count as eligible as they direct people on a course? What about course maps with details on each section? As opposed to the just the whole course.
Clarifications were asked in the November AMA about "private residential property" and "publicly accessible" and the answer was that "our definitions have not changed."
What other definitions haven't changed since the 3.1 criteria update, and why haven't these definitions been included in the new "one true source?" When will they be added for all to see without still relying on AMA and previous clarifications? Can we also see more clear public criteria guidance on how to review shared housing areas, apartments, or gated communities as well as other areas with limited access? Many locations still suffer "prp" rejections for anything on apartment grounds.
Why do we need AMAs to answer these burning questions? More involvement from Niantic would result in not needing these, and criteria clarifications shouldn't need semi-annual updates. How do you see these AMAs evolving over time and will they be our only source up clarifications and answers to issues?
Are “wayfarer live” events on the roadmap for future in-person events, such as Pokemon Go Fest, Pokemon Go Safari Zone, Ingress Anomalies and Ingress mission days, or even as a standalone event?
Has a “premium wayfarer” subscription program been considered?
Many reviewers make their decision on a nomination without looking at the title, description, or supporting information. What actions is Niantic taking to ensure that people look at the entirety of a nomination?
Is there anything on the roadmap involved in reimbursing upgrades to folks who either a. Capped out on upgrades before the limit of “10” was increased or b. Earned agreements before upgrades were made a feature. Agreements and reviewing are hard work, and folks should get reimbursed for their time with their owed upgrades
For example I had over 25,000 agreements earned before upgrades were introduced.
Lately, more wayfinders have been receiving emails about their nomination and editing behavior in regards to wayfarer. Typically, the wider wayfarer community views these as “warns”, or “strikes” on their account. Typically, these emails are vague and inaccurate, and additional details on which edit(s), or nomination(s) were flagged as abuse per niantic were not made available, with no appeal process.
Are there any plans on the roadmap to add more transparency to this process?
Does the wayfarer team have any plans in the works to address the number of photoless wayspots around the globe?
Is there any information you can provide about incentivizing players to join or be more engaged with Niantic Wayfarer outside of medal tiers and country-specific events?
Stuff like in this thread or more frivilous things like cosmetic rewards for wayfarer/niantic social profiles that you can show off?
Just looking for an honest response here: Have one or more niantic employees been reviewing in wayfarer for a longer period of time recently and felt good about the quality of submissions?
Can the Wayfarer team please select a group of beta testers and roll upcoming changes to that group, let them test the new wayfarer for a week and then hear their feedback before global release?
In many areas, nomination take over a year for a decision to be made. Are there any plans to address this backlog?
I have local reviews that have been sitting in limbo for most of a year. The only way that anything local (about a 20 mile radius) ever gets through the wayfarer process is if it gets upgraded. Is this expected to change? It would be nice if, after 2-3 months of sitting without moving - I expect because there aren't enough local reviewers - that it would be treated as if it were upgraded and opened to a wider range of reviews.
Alternately, would Niantic consider enlarging the standard distance for reviewers of non-upgraded portals?
Under the new review process, we are putting more weight on to the submitters to "sell" the submission. In cases when a reviewer rejects something because the submitter didn't provide enough context to convince us of its worth, it would be nice to have a rejection option of "Reviewer did not provide enough information to explain why this is a notable point of interest." My hope is that if a submitter sees this rejection that they try to submit the nomination again with enough information to help explain why it's notable.
Has niantic considered something akin to “vanguards of wayfarer”? Or distinguished wayfinders who help the POI network in other ways, such as handling removal requests, connecting with local communities, and having additional nominating/reviewing privileges?
Does the Wayfarer dev team use the same platform to review as we do?
Does the group within Niantic that is reviewing certain nominations use the same platform? If not, how is it different?
Will there be in the future any posibilities to give the reviewers additional information for edits?
For example URLs are sometimes necessary, or supporting pictures, etc.pp.
Questions for any individuals on the Wayfarer team/Niantic generally:
do you create nominations frequently? What is your success rate? Can you share personal stories of nominations you're proud of or felt wrongly rejected?
Super exciting seeing all of the questions coming in. Keep them coming! A few tips for folks (newer or experienced), please make sure that if your question is
Hope this helps! Any other tips for AMA's from experienced explorers?
Why are military bases in the United States STILL "banned" from receiving new waypoint nominations? Can this unreasonable rule be overturned?
I have made a thread about the issue before here: https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/18860/clarification-on-why-us-military-bases-are-banned#latest
TLDR; There is no reason they should be barred from eligible waypoints being added. They are 100% safe, they do not "obstruct emergency services", and military bases in the US are not top secret government war zone installations. They have privatized housing developments, playgrounds, parks, museums, art galleries, bowling alleys, sports fields and arenas... They are literally LARGE gated communities or gated towns/cities. And if the only reason is because when Pokémon Go came out there was rampant "trespassing" everywhere (not just military bases) that time has loooooong passed and having lived on bases recently, and having a father a commander of one of the most important US Air Force/Space Force bases and others. I can say with 100% certainty the PoGo issue is a non-issue now.
Edit: I guess this came across as rude or a demand. sorry. I'm just passionate about the whole US military bases blacklisted from Niantic games issue. Since it means that military members and their family members can't play.
I'd just love some clarification on the reasoning since from my previous post probing around the community there doesn't seem to be a known answer and the arguments I've been given don't ring true (in the US).
Any other tips for AMA's from experienced explorers?
Try to get your question on the first page 😂