Me and my community have received tons of fitness centers, HOA parks, clubhouses rejected for private property during this challenge. I’m just venting but it sucks since Ingress can’t resubmit and who knows how long our appeals will work/sync with all games. They were all eligible spaces according to criteria, clearly visible on the map or linked to the complex website.
I partly blame the rejection wording but I know on at least some we had copy and pasted this part of the criteria library in the supporting: Objects in or upon apartment blocks, gated communities, or their shared spaces may be eligible assuming they otherwise meet criteria and are intended to be accessed by a community, even if not everyone.
Still no luck. Is it just a bias against things people can’t access themselves? Is the criteria still not clear after hashing it out for years?
(Not an actual submission photo used, don’t want third party rejections just in case) But this community has multiple gated park areas using this sign. Every one of them has been rejected and needed to be appealed to pass. And now I’m out of appeals for the rest of them and have to hope they’ll still be available to use.
I can see how some may be confused by the sign saying “No trespassing,” which, in some areas, could denote private property. However, it’s not uncommon for communities with restricted access to have signs like these outside of their communal areas, to make it known to those that don’t live in the neighborhood that access is off-limits to them.
The tooltip for Appropriate does note that places that may restrict access to a subset of people, like those that live in this neighborhood, are allowed. This is also outlined in the PRP clarification section. Not all reviewers may look at these though, but they should to prevent issues like this.
Are you telling me? Cause I already know and have quoted both the criteria library and directed people to look at the tooltip in my supporting statements. Neither have worked to prevent people from rejecting for private property.
I did note that in some places, signs like these note private property, so reviewers from areas where that may be may be unfamiliar with your area.
There is plenty of info out there in regards to this, but yes, there are cultural differences. That’s what I’m getting at is the cultural differences, not so much bias.
Yeah, it did happen even before this challenge though so I think it is mainly a criteria education issue vs cultural. I still feel the “private property that is not publicly accessible” rejection reason given, as I’ve stated elsewhere on the forums, really muddles it up and confirms the wrong rejections for people.
