TWVer-ING
✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
-
Which of these is not official? https://wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/new/criteria/rejection https://wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/new/help/rejection-criteria https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/21-wayfarer/faq/2774-rejection-criteria/ All 3 are official. Only one of them is has "A generic business, chain, or franchise that is not…
-
Based on the articles, and what I can find online, I do believe that the 3 km ommetje tiles are legitimate trailmarkers. I couldn't find a trail map for the trail in Julianadorp, but I could find maps for similar trails in De Schooten. But the articles clearly state the trail is in Julianadorp. So the big issue for…
-
If I'm not mistaking, you can appeal your ban. What is the point of appealing your ban if Niantic themselves don't store why you were banned in the first place? If it just says, submitting invalid wayspots, what is there to appeal? On the other hand, how can you do an appeal, if they wont tell you what you did wrong...
-
No criteria have changed. Bike trail markers are still legit nominations. Niantic should explicitely say which nominations violated their criteria, and why, so you can defend yourself and appeal their decision. I'm wondering if not doing that isn't a violation of Europe's GDPR regulations. They must know why they sent you…
-
They are not visual games. They are AR games about exploration, exercise and being social. Trails and their markers are great places to explore and great places to exercise. That is why they are great wayspots. That is why Niantic wants them in their database.
-
You said in your initial post: It looks like it's right in front of someone's house, in which case it wouldn't be eligible. Which is a lie. And this: their interest is not creating a situation where homeowners would be disturbed by people playing their games is an assumption. And even if it is true, that still doesn't mean…
-
That clearly states that we shouldn't use private residential property extends to the street as a global ruling. The object is not installed by the home owner, and the sidewalk is not either. That is evidence supporting shared municipal use land. @Hosette-ING, I have been looking into this for years. Initially I genuinly…
-
They know that. They are just trolling.
-
That is just a ridiculous position to have. Every single wayspot in the world has the potential to be a nuisance for someone. So let's just close the entire company, and stop with all activities that are not confined to a single building. You are saying that we should all just assume that a situation that has a way less…
-
You are twisting words and making assumptions. They have clearly stated in the past that things on the outside of the fence of a private home are not eligible * Attached to the outside of the fence. review carefully if something was within 40 meters of PRP to ensure that it wouldn't be a nuisance to the people who live…
-
Then those people should find themselves another hobby, because those simple trail stickers on mass produced street poles along the road are great wayspots. You can have your opinion on them, but that doesn't change their eligibility. And last time I checked, influencing reviewers to vote a certain way was still considered…
-
Naintic says otherwise. You can discover art, history and places to gather with other apps too. Maybe it is you who should find other apps, as you clearly do not like what Niantic is offering.
-
When I visit your country, I don't care about art, history, and places to gather. I want to discover the trails. Different people, different tastes. What you and I care about is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is the criteria. And the criteria say that trails and their markers are great wayspots.
-
They have been clarified many times to be eligible. Their main problem is that the vast majority of reviewers do not understand the concept of an object that placemarks an area, so they evaluate the marker itself instead of the section of the trail that it represents.
-
Same, got 6 routes from August published today.
-
The review page is hopelessly outdated. Good thing it is going to be completely revamped by early september 2023. Oh wait...
-
From the help section: Visual Uniqueness Does the nomination stand out from its surroundings? Wayspots that are easy to locate and visually distinct from the buildings and objects nearby make high-quality Wayspots and should be rated highly. If you think the nomination looks bland and will be hard to locate, give it a…
-
It depends on whether they can be considered the same section of the trail. If they are located on the same intersection/crossroads, then I would consider them duplicates. If they are located at different intersections/crossroads, but still close together, I would consider them separately eligible. If it is somewhere along…
-
This is a marker for the NCN route 51. It's a 211 mile cycling trail/route. It is a great place to explore and exercise, making it a great wayspot. Exploration on trails isn't limited to forests and mountain areas. You can explore in cities too. And it's location has no impact on how good of a place to exercise it is. Keep…
-
2* is a rejection, 3* is neutral. Approval starts at 4*. This is a clear 5* candidate. The only reasons to give this less than 5* is if the photo, title or description are bad, or you can't verify the location.
-
There were indeed people reporting that those markers were being deleted. But apparently, that is not because they didn't meet criteria. We never got a response as to why they were deleted. In the following thread, a user reported these node signs among other wayspots. I tried to get this point addressed again, and finally…
-
Please refrain from commenting on topics you do not understand and therefor spreading misinformation. Both of these are trail markers. The top one is for a cycling trail, the bottom one is for a mountainbike trail, so they both represent a great place to exercise. The top one is for a 3.5 km long cycling trail between…
-
Niantic will not and should not just take your word for it. You have to provide evidence that it doesn't exist at that location.
-
Okay, fair. But in case of jeux de boules baan, it at least appears to exist on satellite view. So why not add a new picture, and report the current picture? And for mozaiekbank, I think you'll have to provide more evidence that it doesn't exist at that location if you want it removed.
-
What is wrong with jeux de boules baan en mozaiekbank?
-
I hope that this time you only removed invalid wayspots, and didn't take inappropriate action against people who are just submitting legitimate trailmarkers. Any news on all the legitimate wayspots you accidentely removed? Are they being reinvestigated?
-
I know exactly what they are, but I don't think you do. What do you think there purpose is? No, it is not navigation. They don't guide you to a destination, they are designed for exercise and exploration.
-
I have no idea what else you could have done. This is just incompetence of the appeal reviewer.
-
If they mark a permanent exercise or exploration trail, then they meet eligibility criteria. And since they are objects that placemark an area, you shouldn't apply criteria to the markers themselves, but to the area they represent. And the section of the trail does not meet rejection criteria.