Hi, I have to report the recent unauthorized removal of a wayspot. After @NianticAtlas
himself returned it, because he considered it to be a legitimate wayspot, it was removed again a few days ago The wayspot was here and still is, was and will be, it is on land that belongs to the city, although it is near a house, but that does not mean that it does not belong in the game. Then you can delete half of the wayspots, or even the entire game…
I am sending new photos, where you can see that the stone has gained even more patina in a year and that it is still here. I am also sending a link to the original thread, where I already addressed this a year ago, including photos.
I walk my dog down this street, like many other people, and I am convinced that this wayspot has its place in the game.
Thanks
Mod Edit: Removed accusations and in-game references.
I’m sending the photos again. But I don’t understand why you’re deleting the “accusation”. That’s a statement of fact, because the “players” don’t hide it, they even mock it, saying that the administrators are okay with it
Accusations have nothing to do with why this Wayspot appeal should be accepted. Removing accusations prevents the forum from becoming toxic. If you have evidence of player abuse, you can report that to help chat at Niantic Wayfarer or through the reporting abuse form linked at the top here. In case the format you are using doesn’t show those links, I mean this one: Reporting Abuse in Wayfarer — Wayfarer Help Center
I seem to remember the post about this on the old forum and being confused by @NianticAtlas’s decision at the time, as it appeared to be on single family private residential property. I’m curious to see whether it gets restored again or whether the appeal gets denied this time
@NianticAtlas made the right decision, but as I already wrote. This discourages a lot of players from the game, including me. I don’t personally benefit from it. I’m mainly concerned with the principle
This certainly does look like it is on single family private residential property beside an SFPRP driveway, so you will probably want to give the team evidence that this is not that. I checked the old post you linked and don’t see where you addressed that for the team. I do believe I can make out the stone in street view here between these two homes
This is Google Maps, showing a pin at the coordinates provided for the wayspot, which I noticed does appear to slightly inaccurate when comparing to the photos posted by @ENLHPkllrs, as the actual stone appears to be under the edge of the bush and not in front of it.
At any rate, you can see that pretty much the entire bush seems to be within the property boundary indicated by the government map. If that property is indeed a single family private residence, that would seem to indicate that this wayspot was correctly removed. Or am I reading the map data wrongly?
Have to agree that this appears to sit along the boundaries of 2 SFPRP, based off of the info provided by others, as well as Google Street View of the bush that it’s under (this is from Aug 2024):
I’m not finding any info that there are any businesses at either of these buildings, and they both look like SFPRPR to me. And yes, the building to the east has both a garage and carport, but that doesn’t indicate that it’s a multi-family residence; many older homes where I live have both garages and carports.
I’d say that before this new house was built it was eligible, but now that it’s on SFPRP, it’s no longer eligible.
In that case, as I have already written, let’s cancel everything. There are many such portals that are near some real estate. The portal has an increasingly greater historical value. It was, is and I assume will be in this place for a long time. The claim that it is on private land is absolutely odd. But it is useless to write it here over and over again. I have already written everything about it before.
If they are located in SFPRP you can report them for removal. In fact there are many ineligible wayspot falsely approved out there. Thats why existing wayspot shouldnt become basis for nomination. I understand its frustrating to have wayspot, that you frequently use, removed. But if its ineligible, there is no way around it. I will let niantic do the final decision. If you have more evidence saying that the wayspot is not under SFPRP, i suggest you do so.
As I wrote, everything has been said and the evidence is clear. The wayspot has already been returned once, so of course I will let Niantic’s common sense decide. No one will accuse me of using the portal often. I walk by it almost daily, I know the local conditions and I am convinced that such a wayspot is 100% legitimate. I don’t know what exactly your SFPRP means
