“I don’t know” is not the same thing as what I described above. I know you’re smart enough to know the difference.
Well, the new system is basically just a system of three stars instead of five. No *, maybe **, yes ***. Most of what would have gotten one or five stars in the old system is mostly instantly rejected or approved by the ML, so in a sense I think we have almost the same range as before. 
1 Like
Theres a long debate if you scroll down on this.
Basically some areas accept, or some people accept as explore worthy, some dont.
They are great placemarkers, easily identifiable and usually in an accessible location. So they could be convenient Wayspots. 
4 Likes
I think if trail markers are good enough to be Waypoints then neighborhood signs definitely are as well.
4 Likes
How so? Trail markers encourage exercise along a route designed for that purpose. The best trail markers lead to exploration of the great outdoors. How do neighborhood signs meet any criteria?
And I should state that my concept of a “neighborhood sign” is those subdivision billboard things. Not talking about “welcome to city” or “entering historic district” signs.
I definitely want Niantic to add neighborhood signs to the Criteria Clarification Collection
4 Likes
Individual trail markers, not the trail heads with informational boards, are not visually interesting, unique, or distinct. 90% of the time they are just wooden poles with numbers written on them. They do not encourage socialization or exploration any more than the trail head already does.
Most people who go on walks do it in their own neighborhood, not a trail. The neighborhood signs are vastly more unique looking and distinct. They also show where you are in relation to your surroundings (i.e. you’re in this neighborhood versus another)
Any argument you have for a trail marker applies to a neighborhood sign.
lol you left out that trail markers do inherently encourage exercise whereas neighborhood signs don’t.
1 Like
lmao, no. The trails existing encourage exercise. The trail markers themselves do not.
They absolutely do. I will keep going if I see a marker. I will turn around and go back if I don’t see one and think I may be lost. Thanks for letting me know what you are thinking, but we are not going to agree on this.
1 Like
One of the main things I like about trail markers is the fact that one can’t often drive to them in a car - one needs to walk or cycle. Most of the trail markers I nominate are at decision points in that trail, intersection/junction markers and the like. I feel those markers are fully eligible - but I’m always sure to write up a good informative description to show how they’re acceptable, too!
4 Likes
Definitely ensures that you are exercising to get them!
1 Like
I did notice that similar things are very common in South Korea and Japan. They often have stones with the name of the apartment complex or even founding stones as Wayspots. I guess they can be natural placemarkers in an urban setting. Sometimes the area next to a community sign can also be a good place to meet or drop people off when it stands at the entrance of a neighborhood. So I would say that the surrounding area would have a great deal to say as to whether it should be accepted or not.
So you are saying they are a Great place that people seek out to Explore? Or are they a Great place for people to Socialize?
To be perfectly blunt, I have a couple places that I meet my friends if we are headed other places. These tend to be street corners in our neighborhood, in between where we live. To us it’s a great place to meet. But these don’t meet Niantic wayspot eligibility criteria.
Don’t mistake convenience for greatness.
3 Likes
I wouldn’t go so far as to say great, okay perhaps. The street corner could perhaps be fine if there also was a visual marker. There are plenty of things that sort of meet the criteria that are accepted that are reviewed and approved by Niantic, like pedestrian bridges, ornaments on buildings, random graffiti and so on. I actually usually don’t vote for neighborhood signs in my area (they are kind of bland) but I did vote for a lot of stuff like that doing the challenge.
Typically we meet at one of a few apartment signs. But we end up going to Great places to Socialize or Explore from there (we aren’t the sportiest group). This time they are meeting me at our favorite restaurant which is a Wayspot because it’s a great place to socialize.
1 Like
The trail markers are not expected to be anything anything fancy, they are functioning as anchors for trail. Without the markers there isn’t a trail.
There is no comparison with a single object that is expected to be wayspot worthy on its own merits. So although some signs might be highly unusual and have artistic merit to warrant meeting exploration criteria the majority are not exploration worthy from what I have seen.
You’re kidding right? There are hundreds of thousands of trails without markers. That’s like saying a highway would cease to exist without the mile markers on the side.
The markers are in service of the trail, not the trail in service of the markers. You can have the trail without them.
I think they’re acceptable under “explore” criterion. Sure I’m not impressed by this particular sign… Especially the papyrus font, but it does signify a place, and that place is unique and important to the people who live there. If I’m in a town or area that is new to me, these signs do tell me things about the neighborhood. I worked as a fence contractor, and a lot of our work was in suburbs with these signs. The neighborhoods may seem “generic” but they’re all different in some way that’s important to the people who live there
1 Like
@NianticTintino see why we need this added to the Criteria Clarification Collection ?
1 Like