I appealed a footbridge along a named trail and included a link in my appeal to the trail map so that the appeal reviewer could confirm this was indeed along a trail. However, my appeal came back rejected with a reason of “The Wayspot nomination in question is a footbridge with no rail, which is an ineligible object under Wayspot rejection criteria.”
Originally, I assumed “rail” was a typo for “trail” and the appeal reviewer simply didn’t look at the trail map I provided. However, someone on the wayfarer discord pointed out that maybe they really did just mean that the footbridge lacked rails. This would be guidance that I/others seem to have never heard of before and also contradict other Niantic review results. So a review of why this appeal was really rejected would be appreciated.
Title: Footbridge 1 at Henry Wilson Trail
Descript: A wooden footbridge along the Henry Wilson Trail in Natick, MA.
Support: A great place for exploration and exercise as a footbridge along a hiking trail.
While that specific phrase has never been used (to my knowledge), it makes sense to me why they have chosen to use it. They are trying to say that this thing doesn’t look significant enough to constitute a “footbridge.” It’s a collection of planks. The principle of “use your best judgment” applies here, I think. Many reviewers would reject that for not really being a bridge. I wouldn’t focus too much on the specifics of the rejection and just live with the fact that it’s a gray area submission that didn’t pass.
You can resumbit it and try to make a better case for why you think it is eligible. But don’t be surprised if you can’t get it to pass.
I dont think u can argue about safety to appeal team. Why not find another anchor in that trail?
More pictures clearly show it is an elevated footbridge over water and not just a “collection of planks”. A local newspaper article from 2009 states they are footbridges “About half the path was cleared this spring, and two footbridges were installed during a the Cochituate State Park’s work day.” In my 3rd picture below you can clearly see the difference between when the 2nd footbridge ends and the actual planks begin.
Another Ambassador in the wayfarer discord pointed out that it seems to be a safety rejection, which seems absolutely asinine given the only reason the footbridge was built by the government in the first place was so people can safely explore/navigate the trail.
Newspaper article link: A new trail to honor Henry Wilson in Natick
2 Likes
I would try the side view on a resubmission if no one can overturn the appeal for you. The side view makes it look a lot more “bridgey”
But I had to submit a footbridge (with rails) 10 times before it was accepted, so yeah, I have had an awful experience with them
