Approximately 50% of the reviews I am getting are for these signs in front of real estate properties that the builders erect. We need a clarification on these. They meet none of the core criteria of a great place for exercise, exploration, or being social. Please give us a clarification I can point to.
And if the clarification is that staff believes these do make great wayspots as “community landmarks”, then I have at least a hundred here within walking distance to submit.
Appeals reviewers also do not set policy. They make mistakes as well.
Neither am I. This has snowballed out of control. Just like individual tees/baskets for disc golf course holes. I keep trying.
I love your dedication and I support it as well. We do need better clarification on alot of things, I find that there is too much grey area right now, and most reviewers have split opinions which should also be adressed.
I called these builder’s signs instead of neighborhood signs, because I think other parts of the world don’t have this same issue and the conversation always gets confused with signs for historic districts and such.
So you want me to submit something that I do not believe meets criteria, have it get rejected, appeal it, have it be accepted on appeal, then bring that incorrect appeal acceptance to the forum for reversal? I do not submit points of interest that I do not believe meet criteria.
I know what Wayfarer is and what the current situation is, I do not need education on that part. Because of the individual opinions, these heated discussions come to the table which is bad and now we are relying on the team’s answer.
I am not going to add opinion on these as I am not in an area that uses them to the degree stated (here they are usually temporary on new builds until the houses sell).
I will add my agreement that we do need clarification especially when it is deemed to be getting to large disagreements such as this with numourous posts regarding it.
If given maybe we need a locked post in Clarifications that list every clarification given, keep it away from the discussions.
My only worry is that I find that it would be impossible for Niantic to give classification on every type of waypoint from every part of the planet.
I also beleive that Removal Criteria needs to be in line with Approval Criteria. If it shouldn’t be approved today then it should be eligible to be removed.
I completely agree with this. Most explorers don’t seek out clarifications. Some barely read through the material presented to them for onboarding. If it isn’t eligible, it should not be on the game board. Most explorers submit and accept what they see in game.
I totally agree with this. The rejection criteria for removals is so unclear and sometimes unfair.
The problem with that is that an area with lots of a certain type of none clarified waypoint is likely to get the local reviewers to approve as they just want more waypoints.
But they shouldn’t be necessary for this. Most people are frustrated so it is better to prevent these topics from beginning in the first place.
All it would take is a simple statement. Something like this.
Place name signs in front of apartment buildings and subdivisions do not inherently meet any of the core criteria of a great place for exercise, exploration, or being social. If the sign is particularly artistic, then the art could be submitted. If the place the sign marks is particularly historic or noteworthy, then the place could be submitted, using the marker as the focal point for the nomination.
Is there any other kind of nomination like this that exists so prevalently in the game when it maybe shouldn’t? I think the can of worms is saying they shouldn’t be accepted, it still won’t stop the nominations because there are so many of them visible (in America at least) that people will continue on nominating them thinking “well I see a dozen of them around me so they must meet criteria”. Then begs the question which will probably be a big “No” that they won’t meet removal criteria.
this happened with disc golf holes. then suddenly people who had been getting them accepted started getting flagged with abuse.
It also happened with state survey markers in NSW Australia. Not being from there, I couldn’t contibute, but they looked like utter coal and existed on every street corner in suburbs with no other wayspots.
It is in the process of happening with route markers of bicycle trails. People still nominate them, but they shoulf be rejected as said by the Team, (which I do not agree on though)
This is what I said. We do need the clarification as soon as possible otherwise the “Why are these eligible / ineligible” posts will just be replaced with “Why has this been removed” or “Why has my nomination got the opposite reply to other similar”.
You are coming across as “I think they are eligible and discusion is good unless you disagree with me then we should wait for Niantic” 
I did state “you are coming across as” not “this is you intention”.
As an Individual Reviewer this is my opinion…
An opinion on how someone is coming across to others is difficult to reject when you /are that someone/. Alternative opinions can be provided by /other people/.