My point wasn’t about being against splitting. I’m pointing out that the person I initially replied to wants “Permanent and Distinct” to be split because he or she is using their own preconceived notion of the meaning of “Distinct” which is closer to a description of being artistic, unique, etc. if that’s what Niantic means by “Distinct” sure it should be split. But as of now, in Niantic’s world when they mean “Distinct” it just means being identifiable in the vicinity.
In the Niantic universe it makes perfect sense that “Permanent and Distinct” are together.
If you can see it but it’s also temporary/can’t revisit then it’s bad
If you can’t see it but it is permanent/revisitable it is also bad.
So yeah if “Distinct”, according to Niantic, has any aesthetic notion to it, then they need to clarify. Because a lot of reviewers think it does.
I would choose to reject as not “permanent and distinct”. I believe this matches what NianticTintino was quoted saying above and what NianticAaron said just now.
[This picture is taken from google streetview for the purposes of this example. Pretend the submission is a valid photo taken by the submitter with a good title and description.]
Ok, you are providing an exception to your rule. Mass produced objects that can be visually identifiable in the immediate area [Distinct according to Niantic] is considered ‘not distinct’, sure no problem
But I was asking if there is any other meaning aside from the provided screenshot.
That does make sense. It would be helpful to at least amend the pop-up explanation text on the form to include both elements. At the moment it is pretty much nonsense! It basically says in simplified form:
A location is permanent and distinct when it is visually distinctive
A location is not permanent or distinct if it is not permanent
In addition to that it’s further confusing in that for this question we’re considering the thing that has been submitted, the object. We’re not considering the location, unlike in the question about pedestrian access for example.
It basically needs 2 bullet points for each example (is, is not), one for permanent, one for distinct. And for the “is” one it should say AND between them, and for the “is not” one it should say AND/OR. And it needs the word “location” replacing with something more relevant.
A lot of people have requested, even begged, that something be done to make “permanent and distinct” a little better. Separating the two concepts, changing the rejection narrative in the email so that the submitter doesn’t complain when the narrative doesn’t match what reviewers rejected for, improving the pop-up narratives when reviewing.
I’d especially like the review screens to make it clear that to reject a submission, you have to do more than thumbs down to social, exercise and exploration, as this alone does not equal a rejection.
Niantic/Scopely have not made any changes despite these repeated requests. That is their right, even though it doesn’t make sense to us. There may well be a rational reason for this, but Niantic/Scopely do not have to tell us how their internal systems and decision making works.
Today’s the day for the new leveling changes in Pokémon GO and after much consideration with the Pokémon GO Team, the Wayfarer Team has decided to keep the Wayfarer Eligibility Level at level 35. This means Pokémon GO Trainers who are Level 35 or higher can now access Wayfarer to nominate new Wayspots, submit edits, and review contributions.
We’re thrilled to welcome many newly eligible Trainers and eager to see their exciting contributions that will shape the Niantic map.
Welcome new Wayfarers. Please visit and read the forums, ask questions you have before nominating and if you do get something Rejected, remember it is nothing against you. Post the rejections here and many people will help you understand why and how to improve you chances.
Let’s remember that there are pros and cons to bringing in new users, and most likely staff looked at both, and the pros outweighed the cons.
Yes, we may have to be doing some additional education for new users, pointing them to the criteria, letting them know why they approved Wayspot isn’t a stop, etc. And this education won’t be limited to the forums, so social media posts may be helpful, along with posts in your local Campfire groups.
Was going to ask in the AMAs but thought I’d ask it here instead.
When the eligibility level was lowered to 35 originally, back in July, what marketing campaigns or information pushes (not announcements) were done to ensure the new Wayfinders were better informed? And the rest of the community, in particular reviewers, would not be exposed to an onslaught of ineligible and fake submissions? Not to mention delays to the review queue for good faith submitters. Each time levels decrease we see an uptick of the same issues - using existing grandfathered in-game POIs as the benchmark, mistaking the category tags as the criteria, not understanding the eligibility criteria at all and so on. You must see the impact this has on the rest of the Wayfarer team as well.
Was the expectation that new explorers were expected to look at the links before submitting rather than doing something proactive? Like - I don’t know - adding infobox or checkbox to the submission flow so they have to acknowledge the terms / policies before submitting?
Hey, there was just an update in PoGo about the info being incorrect on the eligibility change, but even that had an error. It said it would take place today PDT, but gave no actual time. I’m thinking maybe 12pm PDT, but just would like to confirm.
but I am worried.
as someone who is just coming back this helps keep my interest.