You should not mix up in game elements with wayfarer.
And yes a directional marker does not have to be a trail marker, the example of the museum would be a regular street sign. While indeed the majority of trail markers are also showing a direction. But that does not make every directional marker a trail marker.
True, but directional signs that you have to follow for recreational trails should be considered as trail markers.
They just say these signs are the same
You can t follow trails by going from map to map. That is impossible 
and not the purpose of those map signs.
Itās good that this is remaining respectful as there are clear differences in opinions.
Please put game references to one side. Routes in PokƩmon are not at all comparable.
There is a difference between a specified route that is an official designated route and a system that allows individual users to users to use specific points on a map to create their own route.
My view is that each type should be considered separately as to whether they can be eligible.
I donāt think it helps when the waters are muddied between the types.
So if each type could be debated separately I think it would be helpful.
Thatās just my thoughts on structuring discussion. I am reading with interest.
So true, thatās why my main point is on the eligibility criteria. āGreat place that encourage walking, exercising, and enjoying public spacesā
This is why I tried to make my point that these signs are by design, intended for recreational purposes (evidence provided, in Dutch per sign)
The main purpose of these signs is not just to go from A to B, but to enjoy the country.
Also it is not just in The Netherlands where you will be able to find these signs, as far as I know also in Belgium.
They are not rocket science. How difficult can they be? Thatās an offensive comment btw even if you didnāt mean it that way.
Itās already been explained by plenty of Dutch people in this topic.
Red signs are infrastructure. These take you between towns/cities in the most direct way.
Green signs are recreational. The paths these signs map out are not intended for pure travel. They are not the most efficient way to travel from point A to point B. They have been specifically mapped out to take you through the most scenic locations in the area. They have clearly been designed for bike tourism and exploration.
And my comment is not a jab at Americans. The nationality is entirely irrelevant. I have zero knowledge of what hiking/biking infrastructure is like in America, or England, or India, or Japan, or wherever in the world. So if there were a topic full of people from those countries explaining the intricacies of their system, I would listen to them, rather than assume I know better despite having never experienced it.
Conceptually you are right, it is certainly not rocket science. However culturally we live in different worlds. I have had the privilege to travel also a lot in the USA, I have probably seen more states than average American, and I truly love that Country, however if you look at the way bikes are used in the USA compared to The Netherlands, there is really no comparison.
A few examples, almost everywhere you will see special biking lanes. Most kids go to school on their bike (usually unaccompanied whenever they reach the age of 10). A lot of families will go on a recreational tour in the weekend, many have special biking racks at the back of their car, so they can do a tour in another part of the country.
When we go into the city, we prefer to use the bike (because we canāt park our cars there), etc etc
Americans who visit The Netherlands are usually very surprised to experience our biking culture.
I live in The Netherlands and this is how I see it and what it is also intended for, let me explain:
I submit a lot of trail marker stickers, I have some posts about them as well and these are considered eligible as they should be in my opinion. I see these cycle route markers as the same.
These cycle route markers literally have the same purpose as trail marker stickers, to show you this beautiful part of the route and to eventually direct you to the next real map just like trail marker stickers. Thatās why I think these cycle markers are the same as trail marker stickers and I find them both to be eligible, since they literally have the same purpose.
I didnāt mix them up though, comparing similarities specifically implies I can recognize the difference between the two.
Besides, Iām still seeing these signs as Pokestops all over the place, especially in rural areas. Niantic can remove them all they want, but players keep submitting them and reviewers keep approving them. So why keep fighting against the playerbase at that point?
Ok sure, but which one are you talking about? Pokemon Go and this bike system both have official routes and both can allow users to create routes.
There is no place for PokƩmon Go routes in this wayfarer discussion.
I disagree. Thatās why I brought it up.
Going against guidelines knowingly can result in action against your account and I would advice to not do that. The fact that players want them does not make them eligible me in itself, nevertheless discussing it can help clarify some things. But until it has been communicated differently these are not considered eligible.
Iām not personally doing it, but Iām still seeing plenty of new ones pop up to this day. Makes sense that people are still submitting them, since there are still plenty of those Pokestops to be found out there. People see them and submit more of them. They are cycling trail markers after all, simple as. The criteria say cycling trail markers are excellent. And we are told to use our own judgement, so clearly the local reviewers think theyāre fine if theyāre still approving them to this day. I really donāt understand why Niantic insists on dying on this hill. And judging by this topic and many others before it, itās not due to a lack of communication on our part. Weāve explained exactly how this system works plenty of times. They just donāt want to hear it for some reason.
I have tried to explain what Niantic has communicated. This has nothing to do with being an ambassador or not. Trying to have the same discussion over and over again and expecting different outcomes is not really realistic. So my stance in this matter is of no influence, I just try to clarify what has already been said.
I agree this is still a challenge as people rely a lot on what they see nearby. Unfortunately wayspots can be approved that should not have been. Which is also what the report form is for.
And yes you should use personal judgement but that should be based on the criteria and Niantic communication. So hence until differently communicated these cycle direction signs are not deemed eligible.
The reason we have this discussion over and over again, is that clearly a lot of people disagree with the statement as made by the Wayfarer staff.
Sure, I do not assume that it will be easy to get a different outcome, as most people (I know I am) are very stubborn, and it is not easy to change oneās mind.
So that is why I am focusing on the facts, fact is that the wayfarer guidelines promote exercise.
Fact is also that the guidelines promote enjoying the outside world. Fact is also that the guidelines specifically address trail markers for hiking and cycling trails.
Fact is also that the recreational routes between nodes have an official recreational status, the route between two nodes has an official status, that is why there are official signs to direct people.
Fact is also that these routes are not your typical infrastructure routes (so not intended to be the fastest way to get from A to B).
Fact is also that most Dutch people seem to agree that they should not submit the infrastructure signs (I hardly ever see those while reviewing), and many feel that they should be able to submit the recreational signs. I still see many of those while reviewing, and also there are many still active in the game.
Now I do know that some people had doubts if these signs indeed are intended to be recreational, that is why I provided additional evidence.
So that is why I am hoping that with the provided evidence, the wayfarer staff will change its opinion.
They just dont wanna have it, just like the stoeptegelroute, where every where stand stoeptegelroute, on site , youtube movie of placement, even on the map there stand Routes.
And the people still not convinced it is.
And whit cycyling signs its the same, to say its not cultural, exploreable, or you cant excercise on those trails.
But we can in a playground.
