Action Required: Niantic must update criteria to clarify no candidates within military bases
Ok let's start with the back story.
November 2019, NianticCasey says:
Unfortunately Military Bases aren't as straightforward as the other two questions: not considering wayspots on bases is a legacy decision that was recently revised. We haven't been reactively removing wayspots that are on bases unless requested to do so by a commanding officer of the base but no new wayspots should be approved if they're on a military base. As Andrew mentioned in the AMA, any wayspot on a military base should automatically receive a 1* review, surpassing any other potentially eligibility notes.
I'm working to get this clarified on the help content as I can see how this is confusing based on how the emergency services note is worded. The intention there is for wayspots located near a base that would otherwise interfere with their regular activity (e.g. a statue at the front gate that blocks access to the base).
No such clarification has ever been made.
June 2021-present. At least 3 different threads have been created on this forum to ask about this. Most specifically focusing on the residential portions of bases.
September 2021 AMA. I asked specifically about this, the question was in the top 15, Niantic ignored it.
October 2021: NianticGiffard restates that nothing has changed since Casey's comments 2 years ago
And yet, every day I review at least 1 or 2 candidates within a military base. Nearly all of them are within the residential portion of the base, nearly all of them end up being approved.
It is not acceptable for those of us who put the most effort into knowing the criteria to continually receiving disagreements for these candidates. Post publicly that they are to be rejected. Make a discussion post here and pin it. Make a banner on the Wayfarer page. Send an email to Wayfarers. Two years is absurd. Clarify this.
Additionally it is unacceptable that these waypoints will not be removed when reported.
It's one thing to say "well the rules have changed, but we're not going to remove things that no longer meet criteria but did several years ago when they were approved."
It's another thing entirely to allow explicitly ineligible waypoints to go live today due to your inaction and then wave your hands and say nothing can be done about them.
I will be replying to this thread with every candidate I review that is located within a military base and tagging each of you until this is resolved.
This is just one of many ways that you disregard and disrespect those of us who put in the work and it's unacceptable. Do. Better.