Invalid Wayspot Removal Appeal: Barking Creek Flood barrier
WispTrolls-ING
Posts: 19 ✭✭✭
Title of the Wayspot: Barking Creek Flood barrier
Location: 51.515187, 0.096531 (Link)
City: Beckton, London
Country: United Kingdom
Screenshot of the Rejection Email: N/A - Portal has been removed
Photos to support your claim:
Confirmation the portal has been deleted -
Location the portal was before deletion, on Intel:
Confirmation portal is accessible, confirmed by multiple RES players unrelated to this restoration request full-deploying:
Additional information:
This portal has been repeatedly condemned for deletion by local RES players. They have made repeated claims that the portal is invalid, and on each time, NIA either restores the portal or confirms that it isn't eligible for deletion. Yet again, the portal has been targeted, and deleted. This is following multiple previous attempts to do so, as well as multiple spoofing episodes which then caused this portal to become CAL protected. I believe this is because the ENL have used this portal strategically, and would rather it was deleted instead of playing legitimately to capture and hold it as everyone else does.
There is evidence of this here on this forum, such as this post where NIA confirmed that the portal does not meet criteria for removal. Despite this, the portal has been retired once again (typically, directly after being visited by the same player that requested its removal previously).
As argued in the previous post, the portal is in a safe location, and is accessible to the public through guided tours (see here), as well as by boat (see here, page 14), and on foot (see here). Other local RES players have actually visited the portal themselves on foot using a different path, which they posted about publicly, here.
This confirms that the portal is very much accessible, and is no more dangerous than portals of a similar type, such as lighthouses and portals in remote regions. As such, I am requesting that NIA consider reversing the portal removal, and reinstate it.
Thanks for your time and consideration!
Comments
Boat access is irrelevant - it has to be pedestrian access. Your link to accessing by foot doesn't show that you can access the portal on foot only that it can be seen on foot. Can the actual wayspot location be safely accessed on foot?
If you're not going to actually read the post I suggest you don't post your irrelevant comments.
I fully read the post - I was trying to be helpful and point out that clear evidence of a safe pedestrian access might help with the appeal.
Having never visited this place I can't say for sure that it hasn't - I've no idea, but the appeal doesn't give that evidence - including a photo showing the actual path might be helpful to the appeal.
The first on foot link doesn't show access to the actual structure - just a distant view - I can see that you could probably reach it by the foreshore at low tide, but as you are no doubt aware, tidal access is not considered safe pedestrian access (the route apparantly suggested in the last link) and is as irrelevant as pointing out it can be accessed by boat.
I would just submit a photo showing it has clear safe access.
A previous post in this same wayspot points out that it does not have pedestrian access.
https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/39265/invalid-wayspot-appeal-barking-creek-flood-barrier
I need more time to read through this properly that I don’t have currently.
For now, I will tag @NianticAaron to take a look. Please also see previous threads which were actioned by @NianticOtoStar (https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/39265/invalid-wayspot-appeal-barking-creek-flood-barrier) and (https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/39676/invalid-wayspot-appeal-barking-creek-flood-barrier-duplicate-of-already-retired-wayspot).
It seems to be a point of contention in Ingress, so please pass on anything you need to such as CAL protection (for those who don’t know/don’t do Ingress - https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/3-ingress/faq/2819-what-is-compartmental-access-level-cal-1658338731/?han=1).
Using the group of players who went there and capped it as proof of access is a bit disingenuous. It was their experience that time which lead them to report it as dangerous as its tidal, no footpath access, they were sinking in the mud banks etc to the point they realised it would be very dangerous for anyone to attempt going there, especially alone.
If I remember correctly their access involved jumping over a fence they provably shouldn't have as well.
I'm all up for PITA POI for strategic anchors but this one really is a dangerous one that shouldn't be there.
I live locally to this portal, and can confirm that there is no pedestrian access to it. It is a piece of strategic civil infrastructure to boot, and access by climbing fences etc is extremely ill-advised.
Thanks for the appeal, Agent. We reviewed all the additional evidence provided and decided to restore the Wayspot in question.
A very bad decision @NianticAaron
So bad I think this page needs saving on archive org so that when someone gets hurt there, which will happen, it can be seen that Niantic chose to reinstate this dangerous POI
@NianticAaron
Saved here for future reference as this one will come back to bite you
https://web.archive.org/web/20230915182111/https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/46602/invalid-wayspot-removal-appeal-barking-creek-flood-barrier
If you’d ever like to visit, you’re more than welcome to join me. Drop me a message anytime.
You have keys to this station which is to be used in an emergency to save London from a catastrophic flooding?
I swear that last time this wayspot was posted about, it was confirmed that guided tours were a thing? Or am I misremembering that?
Guided tours by an Ingress player with a set of fireman keys?
@NianticAaron I appreciate the swift reponse in resolving this and confirming the Wayspot will be restored. Reapplication of CAL will be appreciated, as this portal was repeatedly spoofed in the past. Hopefully we wont have to go through this process again, unless something changes that prevents the portal from genuinely being accessible. Also, I feel locking this thread might be advisable...
This just proves that you never properly read any of these posts. Both this post, and the prior one, a screenshot has been linked. This screenshot is of an email from the company that owns the barrier, which confirms tours are available...
The previous post asserts that it does not have pedestrian access.
The result of that previous appeal was that the portal was reinstated after deletion; and thus at the time the complaint was not felt justified to merit portal deletion.
It should be noted that the person making that assertion subsequently went there on foot with various other Resistance agents, as the link quoted shows:
So: the previous forum result (reinstatement) was correct; and after the subsequent activity it's hard to claim with any credibility that it cannot be accessed on foot when there's documentary evidence of you doing just that!
The previous poster went there on foot two months after he claimed that it was not possible to do so. Given that he's still definitely in the realm of the living, we can assume that it's just difficult to get to rather than impossible!
If that previous claim for removal had insufficient merit, why should this one have been accepted? - it's not as if the barrier has gone anywhere, or access conditions have changed in any way.
I assure you I have never been near this site and to the best of my knowledge havent met any of the group photographed, but my understanding is that the group who did so legally accessed it via the shoreline at low tide. Niantic have clarified many times that tidal access to a wayspot is not sufficient - it has to have safe pedestrian access.
Anyway - Niantic have made their decision to restore it, presumably based on the apparent ability to book tours of the site which would be a safe and legal method of accessing the wayspot and we should respect that decision.
The route to Beachy Head Lighthouse is also tidal, with no footpath and all guides for reaching it warn of the danger (of ****) from rockfall from cliffs and getting cut off by the sea. Yet it's a totally legitimate wayspot.
No, ones organised by the Environment Agency
Or are you wanting to provide evidence that the Environment Agency does not in fact provide tours?
If it doesn't have safe pedestrian access you can report it for removal - there was another lighthouse on the east coast (Dovercourt?) recently removed by Niantic because it only had tidal access. Similarly shipwrecks will get removed if reported. Lack of safe pedestrian access is a removal reason.
You can see that Niantic previously CHOSE to retire this way spot themselves before as can be seen by Niantics post in this thread:
https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/39265/invalid-wayspot-appeal-barking-creek-flood-barrier
It should not have been resubmitted after Niantic chose to remove it from the game...
That was because Niantic didn't have the full information available to them at the time. They had the word and evidence of one person to go on and they used what information was available at that time to make a decision, which is perfectly fine.
The fact that guided tours take place was new information to them, and fulfills their requirement of the Wayspot having safe access to some people some of the time.