I was sent this gift by someone who assumed I was the one who submitted it.
***mod edit to remove IGN
The description doesn’t even pretend there is anything significant about this bench.
***mod edit to remove IGN
3 Likes
To be fair, we are only seeing the bench and the description. We dont know what the supplementary photo and the text said. So we don’t know what the reviewers were presented with. So perhaps there was a strong enough case made, not perfect but good enough.
It is tricky as the bench on its own does not look eligible as it’s a plain ordinary bench, but it’s about the individual context of a nomination.
I also understand the issue that if you just see a bench in the game ( you probably don’t read the description as it is difficult to read 
) it is easy to have the false idea that a simple bench is eligible no matter what the context.
So for those reading this topic here is a reminder of the official guidelines.
1 Like
I know this bench. There is nothing there. There is not even a view. And the person did not lie and claim it was. It is just a place you can sit.
Was this a community decision, an in house decision, or an appeal decision?
I don’t understand why you did this. The name is on the stop. Why isn’t that information allowed here? The bench is around 35.77684868000999, -78.82364719516906 if staff would like to check this out.
We remove things like this as the person didn’t give permission to have their name displayed on this forum. Yes you can see it at the stop as an individual but that is different. There is no need for that information to be present.
I don’t understand why staff should investigate this wayspot. You have confirmed it exists and that there is no attempt to deceive on the title or description.
I understand the frustration of something that you know from local knowledge and an excellent understanding of criteria, is not something worthy of submission and meeting criteria and the curiosity to know why it happened.
However it is not going to meet removal criteria and there is no evidence of wrong doing so at the moment I’m struggling to see the point. The submitter ostensibly hasn’t done anything wrong as far as we can tell.
Sometimes we need to inwardly scream, sigh and intensely irritating though something might be, that’s the way it is.
Every day on here we talk about criteria. Something in the system does need to be reviewed if this was approved. I did not ask for removal.
Aaron had recently made a comment that there are guidelines in place to prevent submitters and reviewers from just copying what they think they see in game:
These checks and balances clearly aren’t working, and I feel this should be brought to staff attention.
“Using my best judgement” in a review flow that does not allow something to be rejected for not meeting criteria is not enough for me, so I stopped reviewing as was recommended by Wayfarer Ambassadors. I don’t have to worry about getting agreements or not. I just try to bring issues to the forum. If staff doesn’t care what gets on the game board, then so be it.
1 Like
I distance myselve from this accusation!
And I feel really sad that this is the view you’ve and share with the community.
For me personally everyone is welcome to participate in which way they can and want.
3 Likes
I’d guess that this was approved because the community that voted on it was fine with it being there.
And this is the issue - if it was accepted because the community thought it was fine to have a pokestop there. Not that it met criteria of a great place to exercise, explore, or be social.
It is a good place for a Pokestop along a section of the trail that doesn’t already have much to spin between these gyms:
But just having to walk a bit without a Pokestop to spin is not criteria.
1 Like
Your community is what it is, whether you like it or not. If enough people approve, then that’s it. You can always report it to have it removed.
2 Likes
You are completely missing my point. I enjoy this Pokestop being here. The community should not be accepting things that are not eligible just because they want a Pokestop in a particular location. That is my issue.
And if this was an in house accept, that is even more concerning.
1 Like
Your best course of action is to actually talk to people in your community about this.
I wonder if that’s linked to why the bench was accepted? Sounds like its distinctive enough on this part of the trail, permanent, safe to access, ie it doesn’t meet any rejection criteria. And we have been told that voting no for exercise, socialise, and explore doesn’t reject. So maybe the bench is fine, if the 3 main criteria don’t count in voting then that seems logical that items like this would get accepted.
I too would like to see what the staff say. Thumbs down on exercise, socialise and explore SHOULD reject. If it doesn’t, then I guess we will see more benches like this one. Maybe that’s what staff want.
I also feel less confident to review knowing that it’s not possible to reject things for not meeting criteria. I share your frustration at this situation.
2 Likes
I feel your pain. This forum frustrated me so I stepped away for a while, and I stopped reviewing. I recently started back up a bit, but it continues to be frustrating when you see things that should not be accepted, you vote to reject and next thing you know it’s accepted because the “community” accepts them. Two recent cases: 1) a statue that was misplaced about 100 feet (very clearly evident) that I voted as inaccurate location only to see accepted in the wrong location just a few hours later (I got a second statue to review, also grossly misplaced); 2) the 8th frisbee golf hole on a course to be accepted after rejecting, seen when I got the 9th to review. I used to report such things but that too is far too time consuming.
4 Likes
I have the same problem. Im trying to make good nominations that follow the guidelines, but then next thing you know you see the next normal dog sign that is almost number 100 or something. Now these cells are blocked from great nominations (if they are there) and pretty frustrating to us wayfarers who see this getting accepted when it clearly should have been rejected. And next thing you know the wayspot can not be removed since it does not meet criteria for removal.n
1 Like
Following the theme of “how did this get accepted”. One of a fellow wayfinders just send me this screenshot and let’s just say that I am unbelievably pissed about this.
Translation (title): Dog field
Translation (appeal notes): This pole is permanent and comes out at the park.
This just hurts my eyes to see. Especially because it was accepted on appeal with little information. This is just getting ridicilious for me. These poles are not eligible.
To me this seems like unnecessary griping. So what if it’s just an ordinary bench? It’s a permanent structure and is another place to play the game, IMHO. I get it. You’ve probably had similar things get rejected and that’s frustrating, but to call for its removal because “my similar thing wasn’t accepted” just seems petty to me. I would think that anyone who plays and loves this game like I do would just be happy that there’s another spot to play.
Just my two cents..
1 Like
it’s called criteria…
https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/t/seating-benches
2 Likes
I did not. It does not meet removal critieria. I wanted to know how this was accepted. This is in response to a recent conversation where staff said that guidelines and checks and balances are in place.
I think you are heavily misunderstood Cyndie here.
The OP doesn’t say that at all. They are mad because this wayspot “got though” without any valid reason that fit Wayfarer criteria.
I think I can half agree with you. I love to have more Pokestop to play in the game, however it is really a bummer if there is a very super duper cool wayspot that i want to submit, but “this boring wayspot” ended up taking the space and you can not remove it.