Textualmente no recuerdo exactamente cómo fue pero hice el comentario que el wayspot estaba en la estación de Bomberos y que su ‘‘área’’ segura era un pedazo de banqueta (además de que luego estacionan camionetas o autos del servicio ahí, del otro lado hay avenida de frente y lateral pero cómo su radio de alcance si llegaba a alcanzar un poco el otro lado de la acera, sólo por eso era buen wayspot y no había ‘‘problema’’.
Este es el lugar de ese wayspot.
Puedes apelar aqui en el foro en la seccion de apelaciones… pero ocuparias una fotocaptura de el email de rechazo. Para mi, no se me mira claro cual es la propiedad de los bomberos. El radio de alcanze no tiene que ver nada con la elegilibidad, el objecto tiene que estar al alcanze de tocarze.
La propiedad de bomberos abarca desde el pilar de color verde, el edificio que se ve claramente con los camniones delante de él hasta la zona de los otros 2 pilares donde estacionan también sus vehículos, cómo la camioneta roja que se ve.
Básicamente por eso mismo de que está al alcance (poco, muy poco alcance de una banqueta normal, no lo consideraron cómo que no obstruye servicios de emergencias cuando literal está ahí).
Con esa situación haré lo que recomiendas, nuevamente.
Si, no es un caso muy claro, si hay una banqueta libre alli, pero me imagino que la camioneta roja pertenece a los bomberso tambien, si eso es el caso, si hay la posibilidad de interferir aun habiendo banqueta. En mi opinion.
At the start it sounded as if you wanted advice but it now seems that what you want is for people to agree with your already set opinions.
My opinion is that as it is not the “venue” that is the waypoint but the “statues” there is no problem with them.
Looking at google maps shows the side-walk going past so people are expected to walk past this location. If there was a car park at the front which you had to enter to reach the statues it would be different.
Again, this is my opinion. You (and others) may have a different opinion.
So I’m curious as to whether bars are generally considered acceptable wayspots in Mexico, and whether or not children in general are allowed in bars to do something other than drink alcohol. In most of Europe it’s commonly allowed, but this isn’t Europe.
Then we have a second issue, are there other activities going on which would make it prohibited. Being a strip club would be one of those. If there is sometimes a strip club then it makes it difficult when it comes the the acceptance/rejection criteria.
From my understanding it is not the bar that is the waypoint, it is the statues outside.
These are right by the side-walk where people are expected to walk past no matter what happens in the Venue.
Example: In countries where Brothels are legal, if 1 opened but happened to be next to a “War Memorial” should we Reject the War Memorial?
Hey @ValkiriaxT ,
We could not verify that this location provides adult oriented services mentioned by you. We will be happy to re-evaluate if you could provide evidence in support of your claim. Thanks,
Of course, I already gave it as an example with: Art mural on a prison wall (on the street side), the same ambassador said that it should not be accepted. So, you contradict yourselves because if you pay attention to the wayspot criteria, the simple location is already a reason for rejection, however, it exists and it should not be like that.
The evidence is above the post. If they couldn’t see that activity then they didn’t check well. Furthermore, in your opinion of wayspot, rejection, you yourself mention the location, which is already a reason for rejection.
Even so, I sent a report from the help section in Niantic Wayfarer…
Posters that offer prices for alcoholic beverages, ‘‘happy hours for entertainment’’ (if you know what I mean and if not, here in Mexico that is known as: act of a sexual nature). Their same photos where they show you what the stage will be like for striptease dances, etc.
We’ve had many conversations about how the mural on the outer wall of a tattoo shop would not be ineligible due to the location, while the actual tattoo shop would be ineligible. I think a statue on the sidewalk that is freely accessible to the public and is not linked to an adult location through subject matter would be similar.
It’s definitely a gray area, though. The Captain Morgan rum company has statues they give to liquor stores to display as a branding campaign. Those don’t feel eligible to me because of the intent behind them and how closely they are associated with the liquor store (which is a strictly ineligible location). But many of us don’t have a problem approving a unique mural depicting people drinking alcoholic beverages (like wine or champagne).
In this case, the animal statues may be placed at or near the entrance on a very public sidewalk. But they don’t appear to be related to the adult nature of the business (if we can even verify that it is an adult business).
More than verified and with evidence that’s it, the fact that they haven’t reviewed it is different and I return to the same thing.
What would a gray area be like if within your rejection criteria you mark: ‘‘The location is an adult-oriented store or service, such as a liquor store, shooting range, g4n store, or offering adult content.’’?
Where you live, here I already explained that in Mexico and even more so in that place what it is and/or refers to.
I know it and that’s why I’ve explained it in every ‘‘Reply’’
Concerts and lucrative tournaments atwnt for children?
Hello again,
We are still unable to confirm that this place provides adult oriented services as claimed by you. We need conclusive evidence to proceed with removal. Thanks for your understanding.
Not really, an attempt was made once to hold an event (which outsiders paid for the space to hold the event there), wrestling which includes admission for children but it was cancelled, on the same Facebook page you can corroborate it. Other than that it is not a place suitable for children or that involves '‘events, activities or is suitable for them’.
Im not satig it wasnt cancelled, im pointing out the lunacy that wrestling isnt for children.
