Frisbee Golf (Disc/Disk Golf)
Tyronium-ING
Posts: 2 ✭✭
I feel these are probably acceptable as an ATHLETIC FIELD. I recently had one denied, but thought I'd post here to see what the community at large had to say about it.
Best Answer
-
Dice3423-ING
Posts: 817 ✭✭✭✭
March 2018 AMA answer.
Q39: Hi Andrew! What are the acceptance guidelines for disc golf courses? IMO, these should be accepted as long as the submission is for the overall course, and not individual holes. However, I think some agents are applying the criteria (reject) for golf courses to disc golf courses, which to me is unfair. IMO, disc golf falls under the criteria of public spaces that encourage players to walk and exercise. One issue for disc golf, is most courses don't have a sign for the overall course. For example, I submitted a picture of the first tee sign, while the description states the submission is for the course as a whole. The course is in a public park, and is free to play, but the portal was rejected. Is there an official stance on how disc golf should be treated in OPR?
A39: According to NIA OPS you should reject hole markers and other locations on the course. They can be accepted if they are in areas where agents can sit and socialize (like cafes or club areas). If it's for the park (and not for the golf course inside the park), submit the signboard for the park instead.
Answers
I consider them the same criteria as a golf course. one thus only allowed.
March 2018 AMA answer.
Q39: Hi Andrew! What are the acceptance guidelines for disc golf courses? IMO, these should be accepted as long as the submission is for the overall course, and not individual holes. However, I think some agents are applying the criteria (reject) for golf courses to disc golf courses, which to me is unfair. IMO, disc golf falls under the criteria of public spaces that encourage players to walk and exercise. One issue for disc golf, is most courses don't have a sign for the overall course. For example, I submitted a picture of the first tee sign, while the description states the submission is for the course as a whole. The course is in a public park, and is free to play, but the portal was rejected. Is there an official stance on how disc golf should be treated in OPR?
A39: According to NIA OPS you should reject hole markers and other locations on the course. They can be accepted if they are in areas where agents can sit and socialize (like cafes or club areas). If it's for the park (and not for the golf course inside the park), submit the signboard for the park instead.
Shockingly I'm in agreement with @Gabriel0322-PGO in that I review them the same as I would a golf course.
I know Disc Golf doesn't generally have a club house but they normally have sign to say "Disc Golf here", or something similar and id suggest submitting that instead.
Don't try and submit every single "hole" as they will he rejected
@Theisman-ING A like too hard to ask for? lol. Thanks though appreciate you agreeing. Now up to Niantic.
FYI. Submitter, you are considered identifiable in the photo as well for a rejection with your shadow. just a heads up. (Not starting an argument.)
And then you ruin it with a totally incorrect comment.
This is why people get frustrated with you, you were perfectly correct with your initial post, and then totally give the wrong advice/information in the second.
You can not be identified by less than 1/4 of a persons shadow, there was nothing wrong with that picture
Interesting... @Theisman-ING If I am wrong on this I will gladly admit I am wrong. I honestly think it is a ridiculous guidance as well, but I was told by others that it is grounds for the rejection. A person shadow can identify a person identity the technology already exists. To me it is the same with an accidental finger in the picture that was taken. Here is from 2008. Which technology has since increased drastically since then...
@NianticCasey-ING This might help clear up some bad rejections from reviewers. When you get a chance. Is a person's shadow valid reasons to reject as submitter being identifiable? I am still not completely up to date on the PII issue. Clarification would be recommend. I was always directed by others to reject submissions with a person's shadow as the submitter is easily identified?
FWIW I don't fully understand why they are ineligible, as many people use such courses as walking paths in my area. The posts themselves are mass produced and offer little unique difference, and it could be unsafe to wander around a disc golf field being distracted on your phone, as well at potentially interrupting a game. Similar to avoiding placement of a nomination in the middle of a baseball/athletic field, the disc post is in the middle of the play field for the entire course.
I'm sorry you lost an upgrade on it. I wish the guides were more clear, as I understand thinking this is an eligible Wayspot.
If you can identify a person by their shadow, you're in the wrong line of work. People in the background are ok if they are not the focus of the photo. A shadow wouldn't be the focus of the photo.
I said the same thing to myself about the person that said it. (Wasn't me.) lol.
It is on the ingress forums. https://community.ingress.com/en/discussion/comment/62933#Comment_62933
I have rejections somewhere for it as well. I would need some time to find those emails.
No one in that thread was suggesting to reject due to a shadow. A shadow is sometimes unavoidable. The shadow does not distract from the focus of that photo.
The main response got held again for approval. Here is the ingress link of someone else who got hit with it. https://community.ingress.com/en/discussion/comment/62933#Comment_62933
I am aware. I shared to show proof others have been hit with it previously on purpose. I don't agree with it either. But I am aware of people who do reject for it as a result. Casey should message me about this situation, if more information and background is required.
Thats not a thread validating rejecting a POI due to a shadow, in fact its expressing disbelief that it got rejected as a body part because their shadow was in the picture
Incorrect rejections happen, and that thread was meant as a joke. Do not spread misinformation and hide behind waiting for a reply from Niantic to say you're wrong as proof that you are correct.
I am aware. But I also can't dox other players.
Look at the OP's picture
How in the world would you be doxing someone with that picture? No one can identify who that is.
Oh, I've seen people on the Wayfarer subreddit claim that a photo with a shadow in it is low-quality photo, therefore the nomination should be rejected. Of course, those individuals were also wrong.
Of course, those individuals were also wrong.
😂😂😂
I try my hardest to keep shadows out of at least my primary photo, but I understand that lighting, lenses flare, and background all factor in. We aren't paid photographers, here!
I don't know where I saw it, but I thought the general rule was
1. Sign for the course, most have this (though if the 4 near me, only one has this)
2. If there is no sign, the starting area for hole 1 (preferably the map) and the waypoint marker out of the way
3. If hole one is gone, unidentifiable etc. Youncan use one of the holes if it has something interesting about it (one of the courses near me has one of the holes in a barrel, another hole, the one they use on their website, is on the roots of a fallen over tree) as the picture but make sure the way spot is out of the way of the hole
Though oimight be wrong it's how I usually review those, though they dont come in often
Can we get more clarification on this please? For me in PoGo I imagine a mass of people at one of the disc golf holes during an ex raid while people are trying to play disc golf. Same thing for the starting point of the hole. I agree that the course sign, map, or other identifier should be approved.
However, if Niantic says that the holes or starting platforms are ok, then I have some nominating to do.
It is always the responsibility of the Trainers to be courteous of others and respectful of the area they are playing. The entire disc golf course could be considered an athletic field, and guidance is to avoid placing pins within the area of play.
I do agree guidance is required so reviewers can all be on the same page, and that it should be pushed out to submitters, too, so they don't bother.
It already has AMA guidance. Scroll up to the top. Best Answer is the guidance from Niantic from an AMA.
You don't always need the last word, @Dice976jr-ING.
I was adding additional information about the entire disc golf course being the athletic field and noting that this information should be added to the guidelines on the Wayfarer site to make them more accessible to everyone.
Did you really need to add more? No need to answer.
Content like "you don't always need the last word" is exactly why you and others are getting threads closed. You are not following guidance with treating others with respect as a result.
Is there a link to these AMA guidances? My local players would want to see where this information is coming from before they stop nominating each hole at disc golf courses.
All previous Ingress AMAs can be found at https://ingressama.com/
Why would we reject a
Disc Golf nominations? I mean the point of VR is to get players into the real world by any means necessary. Disc Golf does exactly that! Why is the reviewing community so hell bent on denying stops? It makes no sense to me.
We should be accepting every thing we can, if we want the game to succeed. The more we can add, the more we can encourage people to be active, by just taking them to places where people ARE ACTIVE!..
The point of the game is to explore. Why get so bent out of shape over semantics that we ruin the VR experience?