Avatar

TWVer-ING

✭✭✭✭✭

TWVer-ING ✭✭✭✭✭

Badges

500 InsightfulsFirst Answer1,000 LikesThird Anniversary500 Comments250 InsightfulsSecond Anniversary500 Likes5 Up VotesFirst Anniversary100 Insightfuls250 Likes100 Comments100 Likes25 Insightfuls25 Likes5 Insightfuls10 Comments5 LikesPhotogenicName DropperFirst Comment

Comments

  • In the past, it was said that an object and the sign for the object could be 2 separate wayspots, if they were a significant distance away from one another. They never specified significant distance however, and that was before the Wayfarer 3.1. I would mark this as a duplicate.
  • Well, you forget the rejection criteria, but otherwise, totally agree!
  • You also don't see these wayspots while reviewing. And when you submit the same object again while it is at least 20 meters away from all other wayspots, it does get accepted and shown in games. If they would keep those wayspots, they should show them while looking for duplicates, and they would get duplicates in their…
  • When 2 wayspots are accepted within 20 meters, only the first one gets into the database. Even when the first one gets (re)moved, the second one never appears in any games. This suggests it is not in the Wayfarer database. You can't just take excerpts out of criteria. You have to look at the full criteria. And the full…
  • Since there is currently no guidance that suggests otherwise, I would say 20 meters, as that is the minimum distance objects have to be from one another the get accepted into the Wayfarer database.
  • I think this is one of the things they meant with: As we reflected on all our discussions and debates around the criteria over the past year, we realized we were losing focus on what was really important to us as a community of Explorers. Niantic’s mission is to build products that encourage us to explore the world,…
  • They are bicycle path markers placed by the local government. They promote exploration and exercise. I don't see why they wouldn't be eligible.
  • Feature request: Would it be possible to change the way agreements work? Instead of agreeing with other members of the community, an agreement would be when you agree with Niantic on a pre-reviewed nomination. That way people are encouraged to review according to the guidelines, instead of how other people in the area…
  • This directly impacts wayfarer. Wayfarer and Pokémon Go are managed by the same company. There is no official Pokémon Go message board. Conclusion: This forum is the least bad place to talk about this. Nobody is forced to participate or even read every topic here, so if anyone doesn't care about a topic, just skip it. This…
  • How is it temporary? With the information we have here, is there any indication it will be removed soon? How is a single coin operated crane game a business on it's own? Is a vending machine a business on it's own too? (Disclaimer, I am not suggesting vending machines are eligible.) How is it a mass produced object? We…
  • I am not saying these are eligible, as I don't think they are, but it greatly worries me seeing the rejection reasons some people state here. Temporary display? Generic business? Mass produced object? Seriously? No wonder there are so many invalid rejections.
  • Problem is that many people misunderstand "Historical or Cultural Significance" and "Visual Uniqueness", and therefor rate those categories lower than they should.
  • There should be a separate Wayfarer app. That way they could give more players access by just setting requirements. Give Harry Potter and Katan players access without adaptations in their games. And the same tools, texts, etc. for everyone. If they fear the system will get flooded with 14 nominations, make it 7 for…
  • It is a very rural area. There is no sidewalk. That means local authorities consider it safe to stand on the road. You should have 1*, doesn't meet criteria.
  • I would assume roads with a lot of traffic have sidewalks. In the village itself, there are sidewalks, but they stop at these crossroads. There is no signage indicating you are not allowed to walk there, so it should be considered safe. If you have to account for everything that can go wrong, nothing is safe. In a forest…
  • It is not a bug, but it is something they should have on their radar. Quality of reviews lowers significantly when reviewers don't understand the language used in the submission. They must be carefull for abuse though. People could select an exotic language to be the only ones in the area to review wayspots of their group.
  • So what if a car comes driving by? Drivers in area's like these know there can be pedestrians on the road. They drive more cautiously, and pass by any pedestrians without problem. There seems to be a disconnect here between city people, who have never experienced roads like these, and countryside people, who are used to…
  • I'm not from the UK, so it might be different there, but I would assume that a countryside road would have a sidewalk if it was not safe to walk on the road itself. Where would pedestrians need to walk in that town if not on the road? I can't imagine walking is not allowed in that town.
  • Since when is having parking space a requirement? It's perfectly safe to walk there. I don't see a trail marker with a trail name there though.
  • I see now. Wasn't so obvious on my phone.
  • How is it abuse?
  • Certainly not duplicate, as they are clearly 2 distinct objects.
  • Because it isn't Niantic reviewing most requests. It's other players. And most players don't know the guidelines, or choose not to follow the ones they don't like.
  • Why would being in a built-up area be different? Both are tourist attractions. No guideline, AMA or clarification has ever made that distinction.
  • It should be eligible, since it is a trail marker with a trail name. It will be very difficult to get approved. It doesn't have an arrow. People will not know what it is. And they don't like trail markers. It will probably get rejected many times. I hope I'm wrong and wish you good luck.
  • If you scroll down there are some pictures, some of which have trail markers: Picture 2: Wandelboom Schaffense Poort: Valid Picture 5: Zoniënwoud: Not valid (just some paint on a tree) Picture 10: Wandelboom Zandbergen: Valid Picture 14: GR 512/GR 128/ Streek-GR Hageland Wandelboom: Valid
  • The GR trails are not related to the knooppunten. The GR trails indeed have names. Most of the markers on GR trails don't have the names on them. If they do, then they are obviously valid.
  • It is not that vague. If a trail marker has the trail name on it: accept, if it doesn't: reject. The only difficult ones are the nodes (knooppunten). They are not covered by the clarification. But they serve the same purpose and have the node network name. I consider them "adventurous tourist attractions" as well. (And…
  • True. Most cycling trails in Belgium have pedestrian access. That's why I didn't mention it.