I saw a horrible abuse war using the description edit.(Statue in the Sendabori Pond)
Hi, @NianticGiffard
I would like to inform you that during the judging process I encountered an editing battle and an abuse battle using the description field.
In Matsudo City, Chiba Prefecture, there is the Matsudo City Museum, and adjacent to it a park named "Forest and Square of the 21st Century".
The park is managed by Matsudo City.
There is a battle of editing and abusing explanations,about a sculpture built in the pond "Sendabori Pond" in the park.
Title of the Wayspot:21世紀の森と広場 水鳥の像
Location:https://intel.ingress.com/intel?ll=35.803203,139.938909&z=21
City:Sendabori 269,Matsudo City. Chiba Pref.
Country:Japan
Wayfarer! captured screen:
The description is written in Japanese. I will then translate this text into English.
I will add numbers (1) to (6) to the description.
(1)
千駄堀池の中にある銅像
Statue in the Sendabori Pond
(2)
高さ4m程あるサギの銅像。水深が浅いが水質が悪く推奨しないが触ることが出来る
The statue of a heron is about 4m high. The water is shallow, but you can touch it, although it is not recommended due to poor water quality.
(3)
レゾネーターへ攻撃出来ないので陸地の上にあげてください
I can't attack the resonator, so please put it on land.
(4)
画像で池のほとりにあるとわかるのに誰ですか陸地にあげる人は病気の人ですか?
Anyone can see from the image that the object is on the edge of a pond.
In other words, whoever is applying for the edit "so please put it on land." is a total idiot and sick at heart.
(5)
[説明を空白のままにする]
[leave description blank]
(6)
どれにも該当しません。
None of these apply.
I think it is clear that there is an editing battle and an abusive battle going on.
This park "Forest and Square of the 21st Century" has an official web site.
Official Website URL:
PDF of the guide map
Please see page 13 of the guide map.
You will find an explanation of the sculptures that are Wayspot.
P.13
"Sagi (Snowy heron) (See map C-2 7)
This was built at the time of opening of the Park.
It gives an accenet to the Sendabori Pond layout.
Created by:Shoichi Murakami
What follows is a Google Street View from the closest point to the Wayspot.
Google Street View URL:
A)
B)
You can see that Wayspot stands in the pond.
Now let's look at the target Wayspot from Google Map.
The subject Wayspot is an "interesting sculpture", but it is actually located in a pond.
Using Google Maps, we measured the distance from the shore to where we think the sculpture is.
It appears to be about 8 metres.
Immediately after the review, I opened IntelMap. What a surprise!
This Wayspot location was already onshore.
The Wayspot is supposed to be in the pond, but before you know it, it's on land.
Screen capture:
IITC Screen capture:
let's take a look at the review screen again.
We, as judges, should be encouraged to choose the "most accurate position".
But it seems that some judges have moved the "sculpture in the pond" to land, as guided by the description (3).
As stated in the description (4), the behaviour of the other Wayfinder, who is abusing the Wayfinder who submitted the edit request, is also bad behaviour.
And most importantly, I disagree with (1) and (2), as it is doubtful that a Wayspot should be built in a place that is "not safely accessible by foot" (in a pond).
I also question the act of shifting the position of a real object in the pond to a land where there is actually nothing and continuing to use it as a Waysot, and the act of voting in favour of it.
Vicious editing battle.
And The actions of another Wayfinder who abuses the other Wayfinder,
The act of voting to move a waypoint to a "false position" that is not true.
All of these things seem to me to be bad behaviour.
I think the problem is made more difficult by the fact that the Wayspot is now ONLINE, in a place that is not safely accessible on foot (in a pond) to begin with.
Comments
Hi there, @MagicalThorn-ING, thanks for the flag! We'll have your report reviewed thoroughly and take appropriate actions wherever required. I'll write back when we have information to share.
If it is not possible to put explanations for location edits, don't be surprised it people use the description to provide the explanations.
Hello @MagicalThorn-ING! We have reviewed the report and have taken action on 14 Wayspots and the Wayfinder in accordance with our policies. While we are unable to discuss our actions in detail to protect the submitter’s privacy, they may include, but are not limited to, sending a warning message, placing restrictions on their Wayfarer, Pokémon GO, or Ingress account, putting their account on probation, or placing a temporary or permanent suspension on their Wayfarer, Pokémon GO or Ingress account. Thanks for helping us maintain the quality of the Wayspots.
Hi @NianticGiffard
I looked on IntelMap and this Wayspot is still there.
As I mentioned in my first post, this Wayspot is located in a pond.
Using Google Maps, we measured the distance from the shore to where we think the sculpture is.
It appears to be about 8 metres.
but this Wayspot exists on land now.
I think it is appropriate to remove it.because do not accessible by foot.
Thanks for the follow-up! We have retired the Wayspot now.
@NianticGiffard
Is it okay if this request is approved means that some areas are inaccessible and will be deleted if they cannot be reached by Ingress?
It will be a problem in other games. Please do not think about Ingress alone.
Did you ecpect GO or Pikmin players can also reach the Wayspot, normally?
@B00JL5YI7G-PGO all wayspots have the same requirement regarding safe pedestrian access, this is not game specific.
Do not confuse pedestrian access with public access. A Wayspot doesn't need to be accessible to all players, however, it is a fundamental requirement for all Wayspots to have safe pedestrian access. In other words, a player must be able to reach the physical location of the object on foot. If it is out in the water, then it doesn't have pedestrian access.
@NianticGiffard
Please check the criteria again. Our language standards page defines it as an accessible location. If you deny such a way spot with a water depth of about 10 cm, you will approve the action of deleting the important points of each country. Do you mean to tolerate it? Please answer. Also, does the definition of access mean denial if you are 8m away?
Also, how did you also take action against 13 other Wayspots? Were all of them spread across the pond?
In this area, there are many acts of illegally moving the way spot. There is the act of arranging places and things that do not exist, and this is one of the controversies. If it is deleted like this, there is no controversy.
ok@NianticGiffard
41.8990540, 12.4731060
Chiesa di Sant'Agnese in Agone
41.8991090, 12.4729100
Piazza Navona o D&G
It is still being edited, but there are many waysports that should be deleted, so please delete them all. It is more than 10m away. It is only a damage to disappear. Please reconsider.
-33.8710160, 151.2117860
It is not accessible as it is 13m away from the fountain. This portal is subject to deletion
No, you shouldn't cherrypicking fountain Wayspots which 'should be removed' by your definition. Especially those not from your country.
And one is from Sydney..., maybe @HaramDingo-ING will have some words to you.
Your rebuttal is messed up. First of all, if you need to consider the depth of the water, you should also need to consider the clarity of the water and the water temperature. Everyone can see that this is unrealistic, right? Second, a pond object and a fountain are two different things. The saucer is a component of the fountain, so safe pedestrian access is whether you can reach the edge of the fountain, not the center. On the other hand, the pond and the object are independent of each other, so safe pedestrian access is whether you can reach the object, not the edge of the pond.
Hi, @NianticGiffard .
It seems that a few posts from other Wayfinder have entered this thread which are not on the subject.
If you don't mind, please close this thread.
:-)
@NianticGiffard
Then I will advise you as a local person. This statue is officially authorized to enter the body of water for the summer onle
Editing groups such as @Magical Thorn-ING are only causing problems with fraudulent deletion groups. Please punish.
@B00JL5YI7G-PGO
As others have pointed out, you have the wrong understanding of the concept of access.
The distance you can touch a wayspot in each game is different, and being able to touch it at 80 m in Pokémon GO is not access.
The concept of access in Wayfarer is to be able to reach the location safely.
I want you to follow the rules that are terrible, such as application for deletion, even though it is a place to talk about standards.