In my country there are a lot of players who have a lot of accounts, and when nominating they follow the rule “more = better”. In this regard, my vote does not mean much. This was determined in the course of the fact that despite my rejections of nominations for obvious violations, 80% of the rejected ones still appear in the games. In connection with this, I decided to immediately, without waiting for the appearance of Wayspots, file complaints about nominations that clearly violate the nomination rules. One of the last times I complained about an object that was almost 50 m further than its actual location. As a result, one of the players received a warning that his nomination was related to harassment, despite the fact that I chose to abuse Wayfarer. He also told me that his nomination does not violate the rules, and that almost the same object is located 17 m from the location he indicated and there is no difference what was in the photo. In the end, he accused me of ignoring the community’s opinion. How could I not ignore it if the community deliberately violates the rules? Who is right in this situation?
You can report abuse regarding voting ring. Get some example on the falsely approved wayspot. Wayfarer should be able to check who approve those wayspot
The problem is that the submission rules violation and the criteria for deleting a wayspot are different. Because of this, deleting an existing wayspot is much more difficult than deleting a nomination through support. When trying to delete a wayspot, you will be asked to change the photo, change the name, change the description, change the location, etc. That is, I will have to redo the work of the dishonest player. When you ask for action to be taken regarding a nomination, it is enough to point out violations of the nomination rules.
Here is the example we discussed:
In the photo there is a chess table, behind it you can see the road and the museum building:
Here is its location as indicated when it was nominated (red mark) and its actual location (green circle). This can be determined by the location of the road nearby (blue line) and the museum building below:
Having measured the distance it turns out to be 47m ±:
Knowing that in our region no one pays attention to location, I did not move the marker, but immediately complained about the nomination. The man ended up getting a warning for “harassment” (as he reported), after which he filed an appeal and it was approved. Now this Wayspot still appeared in the wrong place.
Hi, I’m not sure I get what the question is. I don’t think it brings much to talk about “who is right” in abstract terms, and this forum is not for assigning blame or settling conflicts within local groups.
Relatively to the harassment question, in my understanding recent changes to rejection reason wording encompass all sorts of broad activities under “abuse”, including personal harassment, and it’s likely not very well reflected in other languages either. Generally this doesn’t mean that whoever was warned did all those things at once, but one of those listed. If that is not what the problem appears to be, here it would help to see the corresponding warning and the implicated nomination, but the recepient of the warning would have to do this themselves. Keep in mind that it is also only possible to see only one contribution in the warning reasons, and that the warning could actually be for multiple things.
Wayspots pinned in a demonstratably incorrect location can be addressed after approval as well. If you were able to determine that something was incorrectly pinned while reviewing, you are also probably able to provide the same kind of information to help chat.
I didn’t ask to evaluate the situation abstractly. I gave a concrete example that an object with the wrong location was nominated. And instead of voting, I simply complained about it. And now the author is making claims against me that I am ignoring the opinion of the community, because I do not allow such nominations to be fully voted on.
Be reminded that here is open forum so everyone can read here. Anyway regarding your example. If you find the nomination falsely located when reviewing ,you can suggest new location before its approved. Assuming the wayspot approved falsely in wrong location, you can still move it using help chat even though the distance is >10m.
Is this referring to fake nomination? Both fake nomination and misplaced position of wayspot is subject to abuse ladder system.
If you find it during review you can report abuse in review.
If the object is real, you dont need to redo whole work. Just submit edit location. If its fake wayspot, you can report it.
But in the end, you are the one facing those local community. Personally i might also experience similar case. In my area exist fake wayspot thats ald turned into gym. I dont create it, someone else does years ago.I can report it but it doesnt mean i have to. Its not my job to report any fake/misplaced nomination. I wont stop other if someone want to report it. But it doesnt have to be me. I can report it for removal in silence but personally i still have many thing to submit. Report or not report is your call.
Conflicts within certain communities shouldn’t be taken up here in the forums, as they are global, not local to any one area. We have users from all around the world here, and not all of us are dealing with abuse issues. However, whenever I have come across any possible abuse in my local area, I report it as abuse instead of engaging with those causing the abuse.
If you are having issues with other players, you can report them for abuse, as previously noted. The link is at the top of the forums, and can also be found here:
If they are harassing you via other channels, such as in-game, you will want to file an abuse report with each game there are doing it in.
It may be best to let staff look into these claims, and if they do find abuse, let them handle the situation. Getting too involved can get messy and upsetting at times, so sometimes it’s just best to walk away and find another way to handle it that isn’t so upsetting.