Resource for New Explorers: Wayspot Eligibility - Discussion
NianticTintino-ING
Posts: 1,103Niantic › admin
Hello Explorers,
We are excited to ship our next resource to help out new explorers. Before you go out to find your next Wayspot, make sure to check it out before you submit!
Check it out HERE! So as to not take up page space in the discussion, the image is only visible in the original post.
Hope you all find this super helpful! What should our next resource cover?
Post edited by NianticTintino-ING on
Tagged:
Comments
"safely and publicly accessible"
Is this a reversal from previous indications that limited public access locations were acceptable? For example locations within paid entry areas (amusement parks, zoos, etc), gated housing communities, corporate campuses.
"avoid taking pictures at night"
I worry about the effect this will have on reviewers, it's definitely possible to take a great photo at night and some candidates look better at night for one reason or another. This seems to indicate that *all* night time photos are to be scrutinized or rejected rather than just the ones that are truly low quality.
Thank you for making this! This is one of the best resources created by Niantic for Wayfarer that I can recall.
Yeah, "Safely and Publicly accessible" has been the reason a lot of reviewers have given to reject places that aren't open to everyone, like wayspots in office buildings, X only safe spaces, parks in gated communities, athletic courts at social clubs, etc. Niantic has stated before (mostly for ingress) that it's a great opportunity to make friends and get people into the game. Does niantic now want these types of places to not be eligible for wayspots, or is this a misinterpretation of that phrase?
I agree about the nighttime photos: I can and have made some great photos at night. Nocturnal players, shift-bound first responders, hospital workers on off-shifts are already penalized in Pokemon Go by the absurd raid hours restrictions: submitters should avoid taking LOW-QUALITY photos, which are not necessarily just taken when it's dark out. How would submitters in the extreme north submit during the extended winter, if they don't see daylight for weeks at a time?
The key to a good photo is - does it clearly show the candidate? Can you easily **** what's being nominated, and is it the focus of the photograph? If these points are satisfied then time of day should not matter.
Hope you all find this super helpful! What should our next resource cover?
One resource I think you help is "Ways to fill out Title/Description/Supporting Text"
Very often you'll see nominations where the supporting text is "This pokestop will give something for pokemon go players to spin!" with nothing about the nomination itself. Or very obvious copy-paste text from wikipedia or anothet third party source. Titles will often be "playground" or other nondescriptive titles with speling Erors or Insonsistant capitalisation. Having an infographic that explains how to fill these section out to help reviewers the most would be highly beneficial, especially if it was given high visibility somewhere like the wayfarer site.
This looks better than the previous resource as it emphasizes the eligibility criteria.
I might choose a different picture for the social gathering. I think a picture of people in a cafe setting would communicate a scoial gathering more effectively. I have seen some tree mounted home-made swings nominated previously and they are hard to verify on location and only marginally eligible.
The exercise picture is good, but I might have tried a picture of people in uniforms playing ball.
I find the "what to avoid" section to be confusing for a new wayfarer. For example, will they really know what a "live wayspot marked for removal" means? Or, another example, are they going to be familiar with "ineligible locations" like elementary and secondary schools?
I agree about the “How to make great supporting information” Infographic.
I agree that the "what to avoid" section is confusing - it's very vague and weirdly repetitive. I get that going more into detail would be too much for this simple, general infographic - but I still think that one section can be reworked.
I also agree that going more into detail on what the title, description and supporting information should include is necessary - especially since a section in this graphic is largely dedicated to how to take good nomination photos.
But I do think that overall, this is a step in the right direction.
It's worth mentioning that someone asked about this "publicly accessible" wording in the November AMA, and Casey responded that the stance here as not changed, with limited accessibility still being allowed. Basically, either the AMA or the criteria page is incorrect, and it would be nice to have clarification over which is the right one.
The AMA should still apply, but this highlights the serious disconnect in criteria sources. Somebody made a new graphic and consulted the "published" criteria page but failed to consult the follow-up AMA page, even though that should be considered "truth."
I think the "places to explore" picture should be changed. That one looks too much like exercise must be involved in exploring. A picture at a museum or zoo would be better.
I think "safely and publicly accessible" includes places with paid entry, if anyone can pay to enter. The fuzzy places have gates/badges to get in, and guards with guns to keep most people out. Like some industrial sites, office buildings, and army bases (places the google truck didn't go).
Paid entry WANTS the public to come. Gated places don't want us to come. Arm-ed guard places are unsafe for most people to go.
EDIT: From this graphic, how will people know what a "Wayspot" is? They're looking to submit a PokeStop or Portal. They might see the word "Waystop" and exit immediately.
Certainly much better than the previous attempt at an infographic. Nothing really false or misleading. Maybe a bit too much jargon at times.
I wonder if, in the future, these infographics could be posted on this forum with a big old "DRAFT" watermark so that feedback could be solicited prior to wide distribution.
Good and the "mass producted" rejection criteria is not here, so it's good thing for trail markers.
That is a very good point. Generic and mass produced gone. How long will this take to actually be followed then.
I don’t know if I would consider it “gone” from the actual criteria. It falls under the Does not meet eligibility criteria in the “What to Avoid” which is not expanded on in this infographic.
I couldn't agree more. I liked the idea behind it, but this section is very lacking:
Does not meet eligibility criteria - redundant. If it doesn't meet eligibility it's kind of obvious
Ineligible location, place or object - ok... But what makes them ineligible?
Abusive location - What makes a location abusive?
Ineligible text or description - again, what makes it ineligible?
Ineligible photo - again, what makes it ineligible?
Abusive text, description, and/or photo - Ok, I guess
Fake nomination - Ok, this one is clear
Influencing reviewers - Ok, but I think we should explain what is considering influencing
Live Wayspot marked for removal - I just didn't understand it at all. How can something be live and marked for removal?
Other type of abuse - Stop using the word abuse so much...
I agree with your agree. They took the bullet point titles from the Rejection Criteria but a lot of these make no sense without the additional information.
But overall I enjoy the infographic and think it is a step in the right direction!
Problem is with @NianticDanbocat recent comments, we really don't know what the true eligibility criteria is. Apparently, everything is eligible even if it doesn't meet any of the conditions listed in the "eligibility criteria". But also, reviewers are not required to accept nominations that meet the conditions listed on the "eligibility criteria", acceptance criteria, and not meet the rejection critiera and can arbitrarily reject any nomination they don't like.
well this infographic is made for new explorers so having it highlight generic and mass produced should have been a high priority. Maybe we will see a rework of all the criteria on wayfarer as well.
The we have the confusion of the below post. which talks about @NianticDanbocat recent comments. These comments really make things had to work out when it comes to all the criteria.
I like this infographics, good it does not start with "find the Nominate button", but
McDonalds meets all the criteria listed on that page: it's great place to be social with others, identifiable safe place, can add good photo and text, etc.
So, if new wayfinder looks up this infographics, nominates nearby McDonalds, and gets it back with "Does not meet criteria" rejection - what's exactly wrong with abusive reviewers rejecting nominations which meet all the criteria?
I mean, from educational perspective, it would be better to give more accurate info there. It's try-fail cycle either way, but the less details new submitter reads, the more nominations are going to be rejected.
This is part of the rejection criteria under Ineligible location, place, or object
A generic business, chain, or franchise that is not locally unique
This disqualifies McDonald's as a Wayspot since it is a world wide restaurant franchise. You can argue about how it is popular and people go there to socialize all they want, but that still doesn't mean it is acceptable. And as @NianticDanbocat said earlier today, just because something is eligible doesn't mean that reviewers have to approve it. "Eligibility and acceptance are separate concepts"
Honestly, if fansites like LeekDuck, GO Stadium, LEGENDS Lima, etc. are trying to make a similiar infographic, I bet they can make it better than Niantic's.
Exactly! And the new infographics does not have a slightest hint that chain eatery is "ineligible location".
So it meets one acceptance criteria, and therefore is eligible, but will not be accepted, because it's ineligible location. But the last point is not presented in the infographics, thus new submitters are encouraged to actually submit it, wait until it's rejected, and look for explanation or give up. :\
Ultimately it seems Niantic/Wayfarer is attempting to have it both ways, and hold the middle ground as well.
A new wayfarer is encouraged to nominate virtually anything and everything, because it’s all eligible.
Reviewers are provided an entire suite of reasons whereby they can can say ‘ineligible’, not eligible, rejectable, doesn’t meet any Acceptance Criteria, and then there’s Other Types of Abuse, which basically says one can reject anything just because they feel like it.
Where does Niantic or the player communities wish to strike the balance? The jaded can call almost anything uninteresting. Enthusiasts can award an ‘A’ for effort. How do we collaborate instead of locking horns?
This should include a link directly to the full Criteria.
This seems like a good step in the right direction! However, there seem to be two intended audiences for this graphic and the message gets slightly muddled.
The top sections appear to be intended for nominators -- "Before you go out to find your next Wayfarer submission, here are some tips... Keep these in mind while you're on your search..."
Later sections appear to be intended for reviewers -- "also consider the quality of the title, description, photos, and supporting information when evaluating submissions."
Maybe "Live Wayspot marked for removal" examples are a building with a wrecking ball next to it... art with a SOLD sign... a traveling art or science exhibit... billboard signs that are changeable. Or if the description says "Hurry up and see this before it's gone." These are currently "live", but are obviously "marked for removal".
I am guessing that the ‘Live Wayspot’ language comes from internal documentation, as nobody outside of Niantic would ever have knowledge of such things, yet it is a subject of concern within the programming, planning, and maintenance groups.
I thought it meant you shouldn’t resubmit a wayspot that was live (in-game) but removed by Niantic.
How many experienced Wayfarers does it take, to figure out a graphic meant for beginners?
More than we have.