I once had to use an extendable mop as it was high up. As yobs on bikes whizzed past…
Nothing of interest to see here just a batty old woman cleaning a sign.
2 Likes
Try to submit it since its festival of colors. Thank me later
I luckily haven’t quite needed to go that far, but I’ve peeled my fair share of stickers off of trail marker signs.
1 Like
What chemicals were you using? 
Cif cream is really good on most stuff thats a bit hard to clean. Mostly just washing up liquid and some water
People dont question generally
I used the spray I would use for cleaning computer screens, but I don’t think that was what caused the skin issues. It was what was on the sign that caused it.
1 Like
I dare not chance it.
1 Like
I wouldn’t have rejected your nomination because of the graffiti.
1 Like
But people did. Twice. 
Yep… I don’t get why some people do. I would probably have appealed it to be fair.
Yeah nowadays I would but this wS long before appeals. Other similar park signs had the same issue locally and were only accepted when cleaned
1 Like
They put some signs up high to avoid this sort of thing …but vandals are a persistent breed,
I had to clamber on to the top of a wall to get to a trail marker to remove the unicorn sticker obscuring the trail number.
Sticky stuff remover comes in handy sometimes.
2 Likes
This is my best/worst accepted sign. I actually had to edit the contrast a bit to even make it show this “well” on the photo. The sign is around 8 feet in the air so not cleanable - no walls to climb. This is one of the prettiest walking routes in the area but all the signs are in a terrible condition. So funny how this was straight away accepted but reviewers hated the park sign that was perfectly readable
This made it through. The following year it had been replaced by a nice new sign so I updated the photo
1 Like
When that happens to me, I appeal. I explain that the photo was rejected for “blurry” (or whatever) but in reality it’s just an “ugly” photo. But that it reflects reality. I can’t help it that there’s an ugly silt fence in front of the sign, or whatever makes the image ugly. I remind the appeals reviewers that the purpose of the photo is so that people can find the spot in the real world and my “ugly” photo serves that purpose. If you can tell what the wayspot is and how to find it, that’s good enough.
Obviously, I like to have pretty photos, but there are lots of reasons why that just can’t happen for each wayspot.
1 Like
But if you look at the table, it has a checkerboard imprinted on it. The purpose of the table is clearly to play a game that requires a board like that. I only know of chess and checkers, but if there is some other local variant, I would mention that as well.
Can you play other games here? Yes. But the custom design is for chess or checkers. You could argue that any table is a great place to play games. But the checkerboard is what makes this table special.
Think of it like the childrens’ game hopscotch. Any old piece of pavement could be a good place to play that game if you have chalk to draw the “board.” But if the board were permanently painted in some spot, it becomes a designated place to play hopscotch - which makes it a good wayspot.
Also, we sophisticated reviewers here on the forum would absolutely see past the paint and approve this. But there are a lot of uninformed reviewers out there. Don’t give them any reason to reject!
1 Like
Yeah, it was a submission before appeals were a thing, otherwise I would have definitely appealed! I thought some elements of the photos were nice especially the 2nd with the sunshine and showing the path as well as just the sign. But reviewers didnt care 
Thats really ruined yeah! But you can make it out, especially with the footpath sign as well to help draw the eye. Definitely fine despite how reviewers might take issue at times.
But the criteria says to reject " * Vandalized photos"
What else could that mean? I would have rejected for distracting graffiti like that.