This is a question that pertains a little more for how Pokémon Go handles its gameboard, but since this discussion is directly related to how wayfarers resolve spots, I believe it’s worth asking.
I’m currently working towards pushing a pokestop a little away from its current position because it appears in the middle of the road on Pokémon Go. Curiously enough, if this edit succeeds, the spot will enter a new map cell already occupied by a foursquare-imported pokéstop.
You can recognize those as they rarely have any pictures, and, at least in Brazil’s case, are mostly from very generic businesses that would never get through ML and crowdsourced voting otherwise.
That being said, I expect the edited spot to disappear if it moves, because Pokémon Go gameboard rules dictates that only one pokestop can exist inside a cell. And that brings us to the question:
If it is already vastly known that foursquare imports are low quality and were made just in an attempt to fill the map and revive the player base, shouldn’t regular human-made wayspots have priority over them in interactions like these? The spot I’m moving, much like any other grandfathered in from Ingress, has a long history of edits, interesting photo and descriptions, likes and routes attached to it. Wasting all that user-generated content because a dummy spot will prevail doesn’t seem right.
Alternatively, would it be frowned upon if I hold my position edit and pursue a report for the foursquare spot, even though it didn’t even follow the usual criteria? The spot could easily be taken down on reasons of generic business, difficult of access (it’s not private but it’s not a coffee shop or anywhere social either) and other similar rejection reasons. But I do know this kind of attitude isn’t always very popular for most people, even when we’re talking about a pokestop that doesn’t exist as a portal on Ingress or any other game for that matter (besides the Lightship map, obviously)
With that in mind, what should be my course of action?
