I know, based on what you already said 
Iâm just wondering if individual reports have to be made for each wayspot or if it is sufficient to say âall of theseâ.
The effort required to separately report each ineligible street corner wayspotâŚ
I think given the (lack of) reaction, and the widespread reports of these being similarly positioned, we can probably conclude that Niantic purposely positioned all of this on single family private residential property and has agreed with their legal teams that theyâre okay with whatever level of risk that represents.
As much as I donât like these wayspots, I donât think thatâs how Niantic approached it.
As a general principle, when someone makes a mess of something, itâs safe to assume accident/incompetence than a deliberate action.
I doubt very much Niantic thought anything like âhey, lots of SFPRP wayspots - letâs go for itâ.
I suspect someone high-up said âmore wayspotsâ, someone else was tasked with deciding how to do this, not enough resource was given to the job and some else then implemented it and didnât do as good a job at doing this as maybe they would have had they had more resource. The people adding these wayspots just didnât have enough time to check their results.
I also suspect the result is a headache for every Niantic staff member on these forums, who do seem to care about the sanctity of the wayfarer database (although not necessarily as much as some of the more passionate forum members). There is zero chance of them saying anything that even hints at that.
Just an opinion (well choice of 2), nobody is going to have been sat at a company clicking and going â1 there, 1 thereâŚâ
Possibility 1: It is a database they have bought in and the data is not great.
Possibility 2: It is an algorithm, computer finds where 2 roads join and moves it back a bit to avoid being in the road but itâs gone to farâŚ
Obviously no one sat there picking the locations one by one, but they absolutely approved these locations after presumablysome checks and said yes its good. And they are what, 90-95% sfprp? Someone agreed to this, probably multiple levels of someones, and if legal didnt sign it off, then thatâs a huge oversight in itself! So I believe this was agreed on every level and the risk accepted.
I did place a smiley on the âone by oneâ comment.
To be honest I havenât given these much thought as I am not affected (UK Based) but I see no reason that Niantic would make the decision to move them on to SFPRP but just that the data had it there already.
I canât say why itâs happened just that it doesnât seem plausible that they made the decision âMake sure they are on SFPRPâ.
They would have chosen the supplier based on some metrics, and they picked one where almost every pin was on sfprp.
Presumably one of the metrics was accuracy? Maybe not. Who knows. Either way. This was approved, clearly, hence why I say they specifically chose this.