I received a warning this morning for a submission that I made, which was originally approved. I submitted 935 accepted Wayspots with a 80.26% accepted rate for my nominations. I have added a lot of good nominations to Niantic’s database.
The nomination in question that I received a warning for is a Fire Dept. Banquet Hall. This nomination was originally accepted by Niantic’s team. (Probably Emily).
Maybe, it was a stupid submission that I did, but from my perspective, the banquet hall is separate from the Fire Department and does not obstruct emergency services, as they use this banquet hall for a variety of different events. I put a photo below of the front of the banquet hall to show it does not obstruct emergency services and there is a fair bit of distance between the banquet hall and the fire station itself.
Although I think it is a fine wayspot and it meets the criteria for socialization, I can understand and respect someone requesting to remove the wayspot in question, but does it warrant a warning?
The email clearly says: “Any further violations can lead to a permanent suspension of your Wayfarer and Pokemon Go accounts”. So if someone reports another one of my wayspots, will it result in a real punishment in game?
Also, does every time we request a Wayspot to be removed in game, does it result in a warning like this for the player?
This Wayspot was accepted by Niantic’s “team”, and now, I am being warned that I did something wrong when it was initially accepted.
Can a warning from a wayspot be overturned? I understand it is just a warning and not a real punishment, but I am just a little worried that someone else will report a wayspot of mines & the team will say “We gave them a warning before, so now, we are going to ban them.”
Why does the email say “Wayspot nominations” when it only refers to a single wayspot?
Also this brings up the question, is anything on Fire Department property like a social hall, pavilion, memorial, etc. considered to be obstructive to emergency services?
Personally, I am avoiding anything on Fire Station property again, because I do not want a ban or anything. I will still be submitting in Wayfarer, but Niantic needs to reevaluate how they handle these situations and the fear mongering that these warnings cause people. I am not angry about this situation or anything, but I do not like that I received a warning for this submission. I know there are people that dislike any nomination on Fire Station grounds, which I can understand, but again from my perspective, it is separate from the Fire Station so I thought it was fine.
Also, P.S., this warning was sent to my old email address and not the email address that I currently use Wayfarer. If I did not still have my old email on my phone, I could have easily missed this warning.
There appears to be parking on the hall side for the hall, and on the fire department side for the fire fighters.
I understand if Niantic doesn’t want anything this close to a fire station. But the ineligible location is one that “obstructs emergency services” and this one does not. I think this warning should be retracted.
I’ve love to hear Niantic’s side of this. Looking at the pics and the website of the department. It looks like they have large-scale events in the hall. Which to me would give credence to @Aquablast64’s argument that it doesn’t obstruct emergency services. If Niantic thinks the hall is too close to the fire station, cool. I could get behind that also, but I don’t think it rises to the level of a warning for OP.
I think a lot of people would like Emily to get a warning.
I respect your opinion on this topic, but I do not totally agree with you. As others mentioned, there is a separate parking lot and it is used for large scale events. If someone wanted it removed, that is fine, but do not exactly think it is warning worthy imo.
First I don’t think that the number of accepted wayspots and the accepted wayspot percentage has anything to do with anything. You could have 10,000 accepted wayspots it doesn’t preclude you from abusing the system. I’d argue that you could be held to a higher standard because you know better… but that aside.
Second, in my opinion, anything on the grounds of a fire station is very iffy territory as it has the potential to block emergency services if people are hanging out in the wrong spot to interact with the Wayspot.
I think a warning in this situation is a bit much. An educational email stating that EMiLy accepted this nomination in error and it should have been rejected for this reason would of been far more appropriate.
This is the exact sort of situation that causes submitters a great deal of fear and confusion.
It’s especailly concerning how often these things seem to happen even with submisions approved by Niantic themselves.
I wonder how many people are scared away after receiving threatening messages, especially when they have acted in good faith and used their best judgement.
We really need some official clarification on this and hopefully a genuine apology if it turns out that this warning is in error as so many others have been.
There is something wrong with this system, OP has more questions than answers from this so-called ‘educational’ email!
I have to say, I am also disappointed in this action.
If Niantic wants to deny the nomination, that’s fair. But this IS NOT the sort of abuse that should be resulting in punitive actions, or even to emails that can be interpreted as potentially escalating to suspensions, etc.
I understand Niantic’s concerns about players blocking access for emergency vehicles and Niantic’s desire to play it safe when avoiding the risk of any lawsuits if irresponsible players behave badly.
That said, I really think this nomination is fine. I have a bias towards fire stations. I’ve got 4 uncles and 2+ cousins, as well as local friends who are all volunteer fire responders. My family routinely has gatherings in the fire station event hall. These are event spaces, which meet Niantic’s criteria. If there is a whole parking lot for visitors, that does not block the emergency doors that I can see are on the other side of the station from the parking lot, then I think it should qualify.
In response to your first point, I was mainly putting my stats in to show that I have a history of making good nominations and I am not someone who have a history of bad nomination submissions. I agree that even people with high stats can cause abuse, but that is not what happened here.
It is a banquet hall though. There are people there all the time for various events. The banquet hall have its own parking lot as well. As shown by the images provided in this thread, it does not inference with the emergency services.
Thanks for flagging this. The nomination in question is very close to the driveway that emergency vehicles use. This could lead to an unfortunate situation in case of an emergency and as a result, we find it ineligible.
Regarding the message, I can confirm that it was just supposed to be an notice type of email and not a warning. It did not go on your record and hence would not be considered for the abuse ladder. I admit that it could have been worded better and we are going to work on that.
We thank you for your understanding. Happy exploring!
Can you please get in touch with whoever handles reports made in the game apps about this? I still have to appeal 1/3 to 1/2 of my reports for fire stations. Rarely to never are those appeals rejected and in nearly every case they are for the fire station specifically. Based on this comment they should 100% be removed after the initial appeal.
You guys have already accepted feedback about the clarity and tenor of Niantic’s email messaging. Thanks for recognizing this issue.
It seems like the automation might be in the wrong place, here. If Niantic’s considered opinion has it that there should be no wayspots within forty meters of an active firehouse, this should be geofenced and explained in the criteria.
If things are not so cut and dried, you can still add messaging within the apps advising that care must be taken. This care should already be incorporated in Emily’s operating procedures.
It still seems wrong that Niantic gets a free pass, and the individual Explorer is bollocked twice over.
Shouldn’t there be more nuanced messaging when Niantic is reversing its own decision? You could have prevented the placement, or advised using extra care, or exercised proper judgement in the first place.
What do you wish for this Explorer to do, going forward?
Stop all firehouse nominations? Geofence them.
Think twice? In-app advisement.
Understand that this particular Wayspot has been reconsidered? Non-judgemental advisory email.
Give up on Wayfarer altogether? Continue with current methodology.
