Live in Wayfarer 3.1 is a new set of acceptance criteria! Please browse the information in this category with caution as it is in reference to the previous review guidelines. To learn more about the new criteria, see here: https://niantic.helpshift.com/a/wayfarer/
Update to memory boxes
Gazzas89-PGO Posts: 2,131 ✭✭✭✭✭
I'm now reviewing number 3, I'll give it a 4 star this time as it's clear a decent amount will come through so visual uniqueness will take a hit. This time I've included the supporting info. I still believe that for this set it should pass but it might be worth future guidelines being updated to say signage required or something
This discussion has been closed.
@Dice976jr-ING was about a 5 minute walk away i would guess, close enough that the first one was the closest waypoint
So Niantic's official answer on these memory boxes was:
I've been thinking about this one a lot today and even chatted with a few folks on the Wayfarer side too. Basically, this is a complex one: it's definitely not in the same category as a little free library but also isn't quite a trail marker either.
I think this would only be eligible if it were also accompanied by some sort of educational signpost or some other marker to explain what it is and why it's associated with memory loss or why the senses can assist with memory development. Something to bring it into an educational category."
So basically only eligible with a sign. Confused as to why you approved this one when Niantic said it wasn't eligible? Just because the other one got through incorrectly, it still doesn't make this eligible.
@Senmana-ING it was me who posted the first one. the first one got accepted and i figured since they still werent sure yet that i would be consistent but for future sets of these niantic might want to consider updating guidelines to reflect the need for signs
I know you asked the question, which is why I can't understand why you'd still approve after getting a very swift and specific response from Niantic saying they weren't eligible. Maybe you'd have lost the agreement but you know they don't meet Niantic's criteria because you were told so. What's the point of asking if its eligible if you're going to ignore the response and vote for the agreement anyway?
@Senmana-ING I didnt ignore the answer, ideas being consistent and in that same thread I said I would but that niantic would need to up the guidelines to suit, and to me it would be MASSIVELY unfair to reject t the rest of them now that one had been accepted as the person would have no idea why its rejected after the first got accepted. Consistency should be the most important thing for new things like this. IF niantic allowed the submitter to see our comments then I would have done that, explaining what needed done now, but we cant, so instead of punishing someone who could never know what he had done wrong, I kept consistent but will be rejecting ones that aren't part of this set as that to me is when new guidance should come into effect
The submitter got lucky in that something got approved thst shouldn't have. It isn't punishing them or unfair to continue to follow the guidelines and reject subsequent ineligible nominations. The submitter would just have to read up on the guidelines or ask experienced Wayfarers for advice when the others get rejected.
If something doesn't meet criteria, It should get rejected whether or not other similar nominations have been approved or not. And when you've been told by Niantic themselves to reject (and it's very rare to get such a specific response about one nomination in particular) then regardless of what you feel is fair, you should follow the guidelines.
@Dice976jr-ING how? how does judging somethings distance based on google view mean i know the submitter? its not difficult to give a rough guss on walking distance based on the map we are given
You sure do love using that word "abuse". It's not abuse to have voted it 4*, and I'm sure the OP didn't have malicious intentions when approving this one. I might not agree with their decision and I've explained why, but calling it abuse is ridiculous and inappropriate.
I agree that without a sign, it doesn't meet criteria, especially following Niantic's recent clarification on memory boxes. However, I don't believe that giving it 4* is abuse, especially when there will be a lot of reviewers that won't be aware that it doesn't meet criteria.
@Dice976jr-ING again, how, how can I provide a satellite view if I've already reviewed? Seriously ****, think before you type a conspiracy theory. I can judge while looking at the map, it's not difficult. Amd no, I have no idea where the park Is, but given that I posted the pic that tells you, it's in Dundee, whereas when I post pictures of stuff I want to or have submitted, you can see that j an from Glasgow, so use your head, how would I know the submitter? How would h know the area? If I did why would I bother posting here?
I'm not the OP, but this is my personal view about this absurd drama of the distance:
If I review something from another city, at that moment I can try to figure out the distance between an approved wayspot and the current nomination, but in no way I will be able to go to google maps and find that same park some hours later just to try convince you that I didn't submit that.
In fact, if I provide that screenshot then you might say that my memory is too good, that I know the correct locations because I've advanced info.
Why does it matter who submitted those proposals?
Casey said to reject them? then go ahead and reject them.
You have a scale in the map in the review to measure distance.
No you dont, you can take a rough guess by looking, or are you saying when you look at the map of nearby waypoints you cant give a rough estimate of distances or times it would take to walk them. Even if you want to ignore that it's a walk for people with alzheimers, do you really think they would be hour long distances between them, get a grip man, your paranoid arguments with people are getting extremely old at this stage
Don't feed the troll
There is a scale in the map for reviewing yes. A hour long distance betwen them nope I don't expect that. That is others.
I just realised that I took a photo of the plaque to write the description, and have copied it in below. I have omitted the email address on there for now, as I don't think that we want to be unnecessarily disturbing the relevant organisation.
I've only just discovered the existence of this forum.I submitted the three memory box wayspot nominations.
I decided to submit all three nominations, as the boxes are different shapes and sizes, and they also form a trail. I paraphrased the description on the small plaque that is fixed to the top of the boxes for the description, and submitted a photo of the box for the location. I was concerned that submitting a photo of a tiny plaque on a piece of wood might not really give the player a clear indication of where the stop was. Photographing the three boxes also highlights the different size and shape of each box.
There was nothing in the boxes when I submitted the trail. I think that they put in items that have specific meaning to the person who is being taken on the trail.
If I recall, the description plaque on each of the three boxes is identical; but I'd have to check. I wouldn't submit multiple wayspots of the same sign, however, as I don't think that it would be unique enough.
There was discussion on the distance between them. I would put it at about 2 - 3 tennis courts:
So based on all the discussion that has already happened, I don't think it's worth me resubmitting the other two.
Thanks again for all the great discussion on this topic.
Could maybe submit the sign then, or put the sign in the supporting info picture?