Criteria operates that the wayspot will be accessed with appropriate permissions. In gameplay, the player has to get access permissions first and if no, stay out of the location (tresspassing and loitering).
In that sense, the access part required is pedestrian for criteria. The gameplay issue of particular players getting access permission is a non-issue with criteria.
There have been locations where wayspots have been removed due to gameplay issues at the behest of owners even if they are eligible.
There are actually some finer points of disagreement that would lead to some reviewers rejecting or accepting this nomination. To me it seems that it comes down to a very literal reading of recommendations and criteria versus a more general understanding of what a Wayspot should be.
I am not talking about whether pools are eligible. I am talking about whether a photo that has no mentions of the pool on it at all is an appropriate pool wayspot photo. “The rules say you can use a placeholder” explanation seems lame to me, because I would understand a gate with a sign that mentions pool on it, like “such and such pool” or “pool hours are…”, but in this case there’s nothing about the pool. “It leads to the pool” is also kinda lame, because again - it’s unclear from the sign on the gate where it leads to. And I am saying all this because:
The rules don’t say that for a pool it HAS to be a placeholder, so submitter could have just taken a photo of the pool. I’ve seen pool nominations that have actual pools on them. The only thing I do if the pin is in the middle of the pool is move it to the side, usually where the steps into the pool are.
The other side of the fenced area has much better view of the gate and the pool and could have been used to take a photo.
It’s not about arguing. It’s about most of people having no idea what I am talking about.
My concern - the pool wayspot photo (not supporting photo) mentions no pool.
Pretty much everyone - but you can use a placeholder, it’s in the rules!
Me - if a placeholder is for a pool, I expect the placeholder photo to have mentions of the pool in some way!
I think everyone knows exactly what you are saying and believes you are wrong. I only hope that anyone reading this will understand that the vast majority of experienced reviewers believe that you are wrong as well.
@frealafgb@cyndiepooh If expecting wayspot photos to have something related to the wayspot itself and expecting wayspot titles to correspond to wayspot POIs is considered strict and wrong, then yes, I am very strict and very wrong. I guess asking for basics is considered wrong and strict now
One last time for the people who didn’t read back. The person submitting a pool correctly pinned the pool to an entrance gate per Wayfarer guidelines. They correctly took a photo of the entrance gate so that the Wayspot would be recognizable to anyone to know they had arrived at the Wayspot. The gate did not happen to show the pool in the background, but the supporting photo made clear that this was the gate to the pool. This was a good nomination that meets social, exercise, and exploration criteria. The sign on the gate had the words “Private Property” on it. But private property does not mean something should be rejected unless it is single family private residential property, and community amenities are specifically mentioned as good on both the review question tool tip and clarification here.
The main photo shows no pool in the background, and the sign on the gate mentions no pool either, so for someone viewing in-game photo it could be unclear why this is a pool. Two ways to make the nomination better:
Take the photo of the pool itself.
Take photo of the gate with the pool in the background from the other side of the fenced area.
They don’t have to choose the gate that you think makes a better picture. I am certain that they have a reason for choosing this gate. Please don’t tag me again.
A sign is not a park, but it may be used as tangible, physical representation of the venue.
Neither a bench nor a gate is a park. No normal bench or gate is an inherently good candidate for Wayfarer.
Despite these points, we have been told that they may be used as proxies for a park that has no name-sign.
I think you have made an astute observation about the view from the other gateway. It does seem to make a better picture.
It does no harm for Explorers to ask themselves about where improvement is possible. It wouldn’t hurt to put many nominations on hold while double checking things. Perhaps some of the errors you are flagging could be caught before they go through voting.
Please don’t let perfection be the enemy of good enough. We need for nominators to get enough of a positive experience to continue participating.
There are ample opportunities to add photos and correct details later. You can add a picture showing the pool. I’ll bet it will get a lot of votes.
Submitters should submit good photos. A photo of a gate that says “PRIVATE PROPERTY, KEEP OUT” is a bad placeholder for a pool. A photo of a gate that says “PRIVATE PROPERTY, KEEP OUT” with a pool in the background is a good placeholder for a pool.
Sorry, but I don’t consider perfection a photo with a pool in the background. I consider it basic stuff. Spend a few moments at a POI. Think what you gonna name it and what will you put in the description. Play with photos, think what photo would be good and what photo would be not so good. Basic stuff. Yes, it comes from experience and a few rejections, and also some common sense.
All I’ve learned from this thread is why it was taking 2.5 years for things to be approved in LA. Perfectly eligible nominations were being rejected by at least one prolific reviewer.
A picture of a sign stating ‘private property’ is a great place marker for private property, angry dogs and angry homeowners. At best a poor place marker for any Wayspot and obviously a ridiculous text to have on any Wayspot image.
A teaching moment about why it’s important to check accuracy and not just rubberstamp nominations because POI itself is eligible, brought to you by me.
“But wait,” you might say, “maybe the utility box was added and painted after 2022!”
True. But if you look at the wayspot photo closely, you can see a traffic light in the top right corner:
“Maybe they added the traffic light in the middle of the block!” “Maybe they also painted markings on the road!” “Maybe they put grass instead of concrete!” “Maybe they put a lane divider!” “Maybe they built different houses!”
Sorry, but this is WAY too many maybes now.
And I’m not even gonna point at the fact that the wayspot is most likely on school property:
Could be all those experienced reviewers I keep hearing about 
