I can’t consider a photo of an object that says nothing about a pool but says “Private property, keep out” as a placeholder for a pool.
I think with the submission where you could only see a sign on a gate, I’d have thought about rejecting it until I saw the supporting picture and then Id have changed my mind and accepted it
2 Likes
how is a gate and a sign not a placemarker? this is ridiculous and i think you are just trolling me now, so i will not reply again
7 Likes
So would it be the location of the pool or the private property sign? 
Because this particular gate says nothing about the pool.
It’s recommended to use the natural point of discovery as a good pin location. If this gateway does lead to the pool area I’d be fine with the gate location.
7 Likes
Dude (or dudette) if you didn’t know they were submitting the pool. You really shoulf take a small break from reviewing. I think any rational person reviewing could see from the supporting photo. It was a pool. Just likt @cyndiepooh said, it wasn’t pretty enough for you.
Please don’t be one of those reviewers where everything has to meet some silly level of perfect to get a 
.
That us just not fair and will make people not want to submit.
Kinda feel #gatekeepy to me
8 Likes
Dear dude or dudette,
If you haven’t noticed that @cyndiepooh mentioned the pool on supporting photo in previous post, to which I replied that even though the supporting photo featured the pool and I can see the pool on the satellite view, the main photo - the photo that will be the wayspot photo - didn’t show the pool or anything related to the pool, maybe you should take a break from reviewing.
If you haven’t noticed where @cyndiepooh suggested that for me it’s about being pretty and I explained that it isn’t, maybe you should take a break from reviewing.
If you haven’t noticed my suggestion about taking a photo of a similar gate with the same signs on it, but on the other side of the fenced pool area from where you could capture both the gate AND the pool, then maybe you should take a break from reviewing and not claim that rejections will make people not want to submit. Rejections are part of the process, by the way; nowhere does it say that every submitted nomination will be accepted.
Asking for a nomination of a pool to have something related to the pool on its photo is a basic request, not some high bar to reach.
As for being #gatekeepy - sorry, but I am not rubberstamping every nomination.
The criteria is supposed to lay out what constitute to which objects and locations are fit to have wayspots and game objects by extension.
It is true that all eligible locations are not created equally. But just because one eligible place is not a good location for you to play, it should not discount that the people with access may consider it a good place to play.
I recommend checking the tooltip under Appropriate in the review section for the private property/access concerns.
3 Likes
I recommend checking the Wayfarer eligibility criteria. It does actually say a great place to be social, that could apply for the location of the pool, not the location of the gate.
What are you not getting? They did not submit the gate, they submitted the pool. The gate is the point of entrance to the pool. They made a good, if not beautiful nomination, for a great place to exercise and be social, and it should be accepted.
5 Likes
We went over and over that already. Thank you for trying.
1 Like
The gate could placemark the pool, when evident. From the text in the screenshot, it does not appear to talk about the gate but the pool rather.
It’s likely the submitter did not have access to the inside of the facility but figured the entrance is sufficient as proxy.
1 Like
The pin should be placed by the side of the pool, not by the gate. It is obvious that the explorer does not have access, so rather than placing the pin in the correct location they are placing it in a location where the homeowners do not want people to loiter. 
Just to get us on the same page, I was talking about the visual placemarker rather than pin placement location. Like how you use a sign as the visual marker for an eligible restaurant.
For the placement, the gist is the assurance that there is no interference with the intended use of the facility and ensuring that the pin still is accurately on location and pedestrian accessible. One can consider the whole pool area as the place submitted since the whole area is conducive to be a place to do pool things IMO.
Another topic that uses other non-traditional placemarkers:
1 Like
As you can gather from the comments by @Itsutsume the pin was placed by the gate. In the Criteria clarification it does say ‘on a side of the pool’, considering the whole area is simply your opinion not some guideline. The recommendations for photos also state that it should be a clear photo of the object. It is a picture of the gate and not the pool. I really find it mind boggling that somebody thinks it’s a good idea to have a Wayspot that displays ‘private property’. If you were to compare it to a restaurant. The owners of a restaurant would usually be happy to see people loiter by the entrance, they might invite you in. In this case it will only be a matter of time before somebody asks you to go away. 
1 Like
Help > Photo Guidelines
- Of the actual permanent physical, tangible, identifiable object or place marker for an area
Review Page > Appropriate > tooltip
Uploading: 20240616_202307.jpg…
I think the idea that restaurants have the rigth to shoo off loiterers as a good example of how gameplay problems and criteria problems are divorced. The idea with criteria is permitted access to a location, how or if the player can have access or not is a gameplay issue. Say play at Disneyland because there are wayspots, you have to buy tickets to play inside but the existence of wayspots in a private property with public access is not questioned there.
2 Likes
The pool as a body of water isn’t the only part of the “pool area” that makes this eligible. The whole concrete slab and seating area are what contribute to it being safely accesible and socializing can happen outside of the pool. Just like how a playground Wayspot doesn’t have to be pinned on the physical object, I certainly can see the take on putting the pin at the gate to the area as a whole.
I really don’t see this post on changing anyone’s mind. Pretty sure some people just like the discourse.
7 Likes
What? 
The right restaurants have ‘to shoo off loiterers’ usually deals with homeless people camping near their entrance, they’re probably not calling the police over some PoGo players. How are gameplay problems and criteria problems divorced? Isn’t that why they have players evaluating the Wayspots based on the criteria? It really isn’t a question about access, it’s a question about where you are encouraged to go without being a nuisance. 