Nah, I knew that @seaprincesshnb knew I knew 
Of course not, you just fell into a Logic Fallacy, that paralyzes society, law and organizations of all types and sizes.
Just because you canât make things âPerfectâ doesnât mean you canât make things âBetterâ
I never said, a clarification of a clarification would be perfect, but when it spawns mega debate and discussion it shows that there is room to make the clarification better.
It still wonât be perfect for the entire planet.
It still will be better than it was.
2 Likes
Mega debate? This is a long thread because thereâs only one comment thread allowed in this whole section.
45 total users. Here are the people making multiple comments:
Top person is a guy who canât help but make a reply to every comment on the forumâŚ
Several ambassadors and then a smattering of others.
This isnât as big of a debate as you think it is. One or two people still arguing their own opinion that they want black and white rules doesnât make it a mega debate.
6 Likes
I appreciate ambassadors and niantic employees working on threads and clarifications.
But honesty, the debate almost feels like ambassadors and perhaps niantic employees are âdefensiveâ as if they are being insulted when a clarification is pointed out to have room for improvement.
I donât want to rehash that thread here, but Iâll repeat when Google Definition of a phrase used in a clarification is different from the intent⌠Thatâs about as clear-cut black and white, fix the clarification.
If I magically worked for Niantic and read that thread, Iâd have editted the clarification immediately when pointed out the worlds main search engine takes a phrase I used differently.
Which is my only point here.
HeyâŚ
Be thankful I rarely comment on the really boring stuff like criteria and rules that I know some of you really, really love.
2 Likes
âRarely commentââŚ
âŚmost frequent poster
4 Likes
Thatâs just @elijustrying and I having a lovely conversation.
I bet everyone else is talking about boring, boring criteria
3 Likes
You keep talking about Googleâs definition of Community as the be-all, end-all.
Googleâs definition is a lot more vague than you think.
1 Like
Type in âCommunity Poolâ the word right after the word community in the criteria. or Try google maps and see if you get a single non-government pool when you type in âCommunity Poolâ
The fact that googling âCommunity Poolâ gives an impression completely contradictory to the purpose of the clarification, means fix the dang clarification.
If you have to link to a Law Site, to defend the words chosen in Clarification, choose different words is my point. Really donât have anything else to add as we are talking at circles.
Its a lot lot easier
NianticTintinoWayfarer Team
1
Community pools, or those associated with sports facilities, can make great nominations and should be considered eligible. While nominating you should keep in mind that it should be a place where people can go to exercise or be social with others, a place of entertainment, and fun.
It is important to choose a pin placement on a side of the pool that respects and does not interfere with the use of the pool, and is a safe location.
To change it to something like
"Community pools, or those associated with sports facilities, can make great nominations and should be considered eligible. Examples of community pools include those found in cities, parks, subdivisions, apartment complexes, etc. While nominating you should keep in mind that it should be a place where people can go to exercise or be social with others, a place of entertainment, and fun.
That addition fixes any ambiguity google gives.
I donât feel defensive or precious about the published clarifications, sorry if itâs creating that impression.
There are several topics that have been raised in this thread that may or may not be worth looking at, but itâs always worth seeing what happens over time. The idea is that there are relatively simple principles and you apply those.
Trail markers dominated the start of this topic. But I get the impression that as time has passed and itâs been discussed things have settled a little.
Pools such as those discussed are something alien to me. So I do tend to view it as quite theoretical 
Personally they all seem the same to me a dug out hole filled in with water with some space around it, postboxes are so much more relatable 
But itâs not my decision. My role is to simply say you might want something and think you have a watertight (
oh the heat is getting to me) argument but temper your expectations because it might not be viewed that way.
I feel the conversation on this aspect is going round in circles and the points have been well made.
Perhaps we can leave this one for now?
4 Likes
Yup yup
@Elijustrying, first of all, I would like to apologize for my lack of words. I wanted to keep the text as short as possible, but when I looked back at the post myself, I realized that there werenât enough words.
I think âMachine Learning in Wayfarerâ is involved in the review, but looking at other topics I feel that sometimes the decision is not sufficient. In the future, âMachine Learning in Wayfarerâ may be able to do all the review, but for now, I think the âcommunityâ still needs to do the review properly. Therefore, I thought it was necessary to further organize and enrich the contents of Criteria. I think it would be desirable to summarize the details of the items considered and concluded by the âcommunityâ and incorporate them into the Criteria, including how best to consider and make decisions. (Therefore, I think there will be a lot of description in the relevant part of Criteria.)
By the way, if AI were to revise Criteria, what would it create? Since it seems that they refer to information on the internet, AI will also refer to discussions in this community.
Iâd like to have further clarification on Picnic Areas - if a park has picnic tables all over it, does every table qualify as a separate wayspot?
No, not every table. But if for example one part of the park had a picnic area, and there was a separate area in another part of the park, those could potentially be separate nominations.
So possibly an area with the lake view might be separate from an area overlooking a playground etc
To follow on from @frealafgb
An individual table would not be an instant reject, but its situation would need to be considered.
For example
In some small parks the picnic area may have only one table so that could be considered.
There may be a single picnic table but the view from that spot is great, again consider the whole of the location and situation.
2 Likes
@elijustrying @frealafgb
There is another park that has multiple tables together at one spot:
This area is one wayspot, which makes sense.
The first park is different, as it has a lot of tables separately all over it. Itâs big. The view from all the tables is about the same. Thereâs no marked âthis is a picnic areaâ zone - drop a blanket anywhere you want, and you have your own picnic area. 4 of the tables are wayspots. Iâd like to know if I can remove them or if I can start adding all the tables - Google Maps.
Also, while I appreciate your input, Iâd like an official clarification from Niantic.
I think in that first park you shared I might submit like 2 or 3 sets of tables as an âareaâ loosely defined by what they overlook
I would not be looking to remove things or add every table. Obviously I am not there looking at real life but that is my feeling from the map you shared.
2 Likes
Itâs not up to me to offer an opinion since you are talking about removing wayspots, that purely lies in the hands of the Wayfarer Team.
Which of the removal criteria do you think they meet as they appear from what you shown to be there?
I donât think there is anything for Wayfarer Team to comment on here. The published clarification gives a broad enough base to apply to individual circumstances for submission and reviewing. Anything they decide if you submit a request on this individual case applies to this individual case only.
1 Like