It absolutely comes down to judgment. In terms of big hall vs small hall, i dont mind small hall voting, but it has to be based on the information provided in the nomination.
I’ll continue your analogy…
If the small hall nominee description was something like “this person only played for 3 months but they taught Phil Niekro how to throw a knuckleball,” i might look pretty favorably at them. If the description was “this guy only played for 3 months but he went to the same high school as me,” nope, that won’t sway me.
To tie it all back together, someone saying kids like to explore neighborhood signs is the equivalent of the guy who went to high school with a randomly not famous one-time pro baseball player. That’s nice for them, but it has no bearing on me or how i vote.
I don’t mind if you never vote for any neighborhood sign.
I am not telling you, you must or even should.
I am telling you (and community) why I would join Florida group and vote for them.
And people of Florida obvious think they are explore worthy, and probably for a different reason then my kid-colored-view.
If people agree with you and just vote no, I won’t complain.
I said my why I will, and if that convinces others and they vote differently, cool, if not cool too.
I think Welcome-to-City-Signs and Neighborhood Signs should be, not that they must be, spots.
So I checked out this thread because my neighborhood replaced it’s signs in the last year or so, and I like them. Also, my neighborhood, it’s name, it’s history, are significant to me. There’s only one of this neighborhood, how can it be generic? I feel this way about all the neighborhoods I’ve lived in the past several decades. And I think it’s interesting as I walk, bicycle, and (when I have to) drive around Louisville, Kentucky, USA, to see the different neighborhoods that make up Jefferson County. Is it boring to you? Be my guest, yawn away. On the whole I approve neighborhood and subdivision signs if they seem real and permanent, not PRP etc. Reading this I realize that despite my current great reviewer rating I am in a minority, and i might not have much of a chance with my own nominations, but I think I’ll give it a shot
The great thing about being an explorer/wayfiner is we don’t all have to agree. I am on the side of a neighborhood signs can be eligible. When I come across one that I think fits the criteria. I will give it high marks. When I see one that doesn’t, I vote accordingly as well.
We interpret the criteria based on our own biases and previous experiences. As well as what is generally accepted in your local area.
Case in point - German trail markers. I would have been on the total wrong side.
I see a lot of people saying Niantic has said “No” to these signs… I don’t remember them ever saying no, they just said they needed to be / have some significance.
City welcome signs I’ve always see ones that say “Welcome to City” or something almost always get accepted by Niantic back when they did all the decisions.
Personally ,it’d be a “yes” from me!
I’m a sucker for nominations that contain little factoids about the area.
If this gets rejected, resubmit it.
Even if you have to resubmit more than once!
(I had to resubmit my local fruit shop 4 or 5 times before it got accepted.
-photographically mine wasn’t super interesting,but it’s a well known local icon,and I did a great write up for it.
Thanks for your input! I just uploaded the sign for my city, and did put in a few facts, not as many as I’d like, but reviewers only got so much patience! I mean, you could write a book, and many have been written about the whiskey industry in Kentucky, and this place was a centre of it! Of course, it’s not all about partying… part of the reason for some of these cities breaking away from Louisville was business and taxes, sure, but in some cases it was racial prejudice… I don’t know the history of my current home in this regard, but now it’s almost entirely run by Black women, so at least we got here eventually!
Is it sufficient to just mark not social, exercise, explore? Will that get it rejected? The location for most of these is technically appropriate (public), safe, permanent, etc and not a generic business, but obviously generic signs should be rejected. How do I go about rejecting these?
Precisely. It’s elitist to call one permanent neighborhood entry sign (that’s attractive & has a significant presence in the area) “generic” because it’s suburbia & another one “historic” because it’s in a fancier area. Park signs get accepted. People ALSO walk the trails around neighborhood areas and maybe pokestops at neighborhood signs would encourage more people to venture out on a walk & play some Pokémon Go. Isn’t the point fitness & “Going” outside? …And now with routes, there’s even more incentive to have pokéstops around neighborhoods to encourage players to create walking routes. The few pokéstops in my “generic” suburban area get a lot of play, so shouldn’t that justify MORE.
“Point of interest” should be relative to the area. We don’t all live in downtown Tokyo, Chicago, etc.
I have been following the conversation closely as I see there are many nuances to the topic. But when I am uncertain about a rating for a wayspot I go back to the basics:
Does this particular place/thing draw me here to:
Be social - Yes or No
Exercise - Yes or No
Explore - Yes or No
is there a Rejection criteria to consider?
A. Is this on Single Family Private Residential Property? Yes or No
B. Does this obstruct Emergency Services? Yes or No?
C. Can I access it on foot? Yes or No?
D. Is it on a property where children will be left in the care of people that are not their parents or guardians? Yes or No?
For the most part 1-3 are ‘No’ which means I would not pass a Community sign. But there are some that seem truly unique so I look to the rejection criteria. Sometimes they are effectively on SFPRP or I cannot walk up to it without trampling the flowers etc.
Additionally the Community signs are often placed at many places bordering the neighborhood. So they are neither unique or trail markers.
Many people try and nominate things that are good for the community, like places to donate goods or a designated landmark if the kids get separated from their friends or family. While these can be great for a community:
I don’ see how they apply to being a Great place to be social with others (meet up then leave - I can’t say I’ve ever seen people picnic in front of a Community sign).
I don’t see how they area a Great place for exercise (I’ve never seen anyone doing exercise at a Community sign)
As mentioned there are cases that they might be intersecting to explore.
Sorry I didn’t realize this would be quite so pointed. But until I start seeing folks hanging out/exercising at Community Signs, I will be evaluating them on their artistic or academic qualifications.
I wish y’all would keep in mind that “Attractive, Permanent Neighborhood Sign + Fountain or Sculpture/etc” costs a lot more for the neighborhood to build than simply “Attractive, Permanent Neighborhood Sign,” which means that a criteria to have the extra fountain/sculpture/building/etc in order to accept a neighborhood sign as a pokéstop privileges richer neighborhoods. It would be nice if Niantic, Pokémon Go, and Wayfarer reviewers considered inclusivity in what they consider a valid “point of interest” for a given area, so that more people could enjoy the game and have reasons to “Go” out and explore their neighborhoods.
The same could be said for public art, sculptures, large parks, murals, etc. All of those are more likely to be found in neighborhoods/cities with more resources. I personally do my best to add things in areas that aren’t wealthy, particularly locally owned restaurants that feature interesting cuisines.
But no one is guaranteed to have a wayspot in their neighborhood. Sometimes you just have to explore further than the end of your street.
I think equity is something we was wayfarers can get better at. Going to an area, urban or rural and giving them the POI’s they need to play. This is a great idea!
