Nadiwereb-PGO
✭✭✭✭✭
Nadiwereb-PGO ✭✭✭✭✭
Reactions
Comments
-
But from whom? And how? WE don't even know who we are talking about, there's nothing to identify this "Youtube guy" from.
-
What deleted area? I still don't understand what you're trying to ask.
-
Who exactly is this person and what exactly are you expecting from this topic?
-
I set my bonus location to Sierra Leone last November exactly in order to help Western African communities. I received and reviewed a few (maybe 20-30) nominations from Conakry itself, as well as a few submissions from other parts of the country. The thing is, many of them didn't even have supporting photos, which means…
-
If it's on single-family private property, reject it. If it's not, accept it. Simple as that. (Assuming it's real and permanent, of course)
-
From the November 2020 AMA: Q: Can you explain what “providing an advantage to a single player/collective group” means? A: We definitely understand that there are some strategically placed Wayspots that are critical for competitive play in Niantic apps, including areas that have restricted or limited access. This doesn’t…
-
Also, you will need to provide at least some evidence that the PoI is actually there and shouldn't have been removed.
-
I completely agree with you on that the nomination should have been postponed until it's finished. However, it wasn't and there I was, having to decide whether it met acceptance criteria (IMO, yes) and if it met rejection criteria (I don't think so). So, purely based on my interpretation of the guidelines, I accepted it.…
-
No, it doesn't. It's on the other side of the road from the neighourhood, so those "few steps" you mention are on a road with no legal or safe pedestrian crossing. There is no sidewalk on that side of the road, unpaved or not, only a drainage ditch.
-
It's awesome that you actually confirmed the removal reason. May I suggest that cou automatically include this when you deny a removal appeal? It would spare a lot of unnecessary annoyance and frustration that results from uncertainty.
-
Whether it's temporary, artistic or if it should have been accepted in the first place is completely irrelevant here. These are not removal criteria, so these aren't the questions you should be arguing about. The thing is, this graffiti has no safe pedestrian access. Yes, there is a safe pedestrian pathway on the other…
-
Again, in bold capital letters, because you don't seem to be able to understand it otherwise: YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BREAK THE LAW TO ACCESS THAT WAYSPOT. THE WAYSPOT IS ENTIRELY LEGITIMATE AND SHOULD NOT BE REMOVED.
-
I agree that these would be extremely cool wayspots IF (and that's a big if) you could prove they're permanent. The problem is that such swings are very quick and easy to put up and remove, so you will need extensive proof (articles, old photos, reviews etc.) to even be considered, and even if you do get the proof, there…
-
That's not on Niantic, that's on people. Niantic explicitly tells you to adhere to local laws and be considerate of your surroundings when you're playing their games. If you choose to do illegal things anyways, it's on you. If football hooligans break windows after a game, you don't call for banning football and destroying…
-
Except these rules are not advertised in-game during the nomination process or elsewhere, nor are they actually openly discussed anywhere by Niantic. The S2-cell system, while well-known for people who frequent forums like this, has never been officially announced in any way as far as I know. The S2 cells are not visible…
-
It's an interesting building, though, with unique architecture, so I think it meets the "exploration" criteria.
-
@NianticCasey-ING Hi Casey, I'd like to have my bonus location reset as well for the Challenge.
-
Alright, I'll say it out loud: I don't care about the "faction competition" within Ingress, not how healthy it is or how rude some people are. I don't play Ingress. All these things are completely meaningless to me, as they should always be on this forum, because this forum is for Wayfarer only. (Just to be clear: I…
-
I don't love wayspots with limited access, nor do I have any other kind of feeling towards them. However, removing legitimate wayspots because someone is using them in a rude fashion would soon snowball into chaos and the destruction of large portions of the wayspot network. If you take a step back, you will see why.
-
Also: rejection criteria are not tha same as removal criteria. Even if the wayspot shouldn't have been accepted in the first place (which doesn't seem to be the case here), it will still only be removed if it meets removal criteria (permanently removed/nonexistent, K12, single-family residential area, no pedestrian access,…
-
First of all: Yes, this is an example of poor wording that creates more confusion than necessary. But this rejection criteria clearly refers to nominations where the location marker is placed away from the actual location of the object. (Note the second sentence about location edits, which refers to the exact same type of…
-
Yes, I fully understand your appeal, I've seen tons of similar ones. I don't remember a single one that was successful unless the poster could actually, legitimately argue that the poI met removal criteria. As far as Wayfarer rules go, limited access is perfectly okay.
-
There is nothing abusive about a legitimate PoI that is only accessible to certain people. This has always been the case and this has been confirmed in the 2020 November AMA. "Abusive location" in the rejection criteria refer to - and always have referred to - nominations where the location marker is placed away from the…
-
Is the object (the sandbox) at the correct location, though? If yes, the wayspot will not, and should not, be removed. EDIT: you can press "disagree" all you like, wayspot removals don't work like this. So unless you can argue that the object meets some actual removal criteria, it will remain in the network.
-
What's missing from your appeal: is it a legitimate, existing object at the correct place? If it is, your appeal will be rejected because what you described is not grounds for removal.
-
This is one of those proposals that keep popping up and they read like a good idea at first, but when you think about long-term systemic consequences, it's really not that great. Think about regional/minority languages. Take Romansh, for example, which is not even an extreme example: it's spoken by tens of thousands of…
-
If it is a business, I suggest you take another photo that shows both the graffiti and the building as a business (or at least that it's not a single-family home or a school). Street View is old there and even though the building really, really doesn't look like a single-family home, I think a better picture could settle…
-
This is not how it works. You have to nominate (or, if you're not on a level high enough, have someone nominate) an eligible object. After that, it goes through a review process and if it's accepted by the community, it appears in the games. Niantic won't put a stop at your location just like that.
-
Could you please rephrase your question in a way that others could understand what your problem is? Location, description of the situatuon, photos etc. It's currently impossible to decipher your post.
-
I know that, I just don't really know much about it beyond that. But if Wikipedia and a few other sources I found are correct, it's also an active scientific research hub and there are visitor tours when there's no pandemic. I see no reason to exclude it from the portal network.
