This got rejected on appeal. (Initially rejected by AI, understandably.)
Am I crazy for thinking a tongue-in-cheek warning about releasing alligators at night (in Canada, to be clear) legitimately makes this “generic warning sign” unique?
Do they mass produce these or something? Everyone seems to do a bit of a double-take or at least roll their eyes when they see this thing.
Hey there. I find this appeal was rightfully done. This sign doesn’t meet any of the 3 basic criteria,
I don’t live in Canada so I can’t confirm that these signs are mass produced, but if I may guess, they will be mass produced. This is just a basic warning sign by the waters and doesn’t meet criteria.
My position would be it’s a good place to explore because warning signs don’t normally have jokes about releasing alligators on them as a method of enforcement. (So if you actually take the time to read it it’s a bit of a surprise treat.)
I get that warning signs in general don’t meet criteria but this does seem interesting to people I’ve shown it to…
Are reviewers taking the sign totally seriously? The reason I mention being in Canada is because Alligators wouldn’t survive outdoors here.
It doesn’t matter that the sign has a joke on it if you read it a bit differently, it still doesn’t change the fact it does not meet criteria. Why would I explore a place if there are alligators there?
As for the reviewers, I cannot see in somebody’s head, every reviewer has a own opinion on what they find good and bad and try to review to the best of their abilities.
It’s not a joke if you read it a bit differently. It’s a joke if you read it at all.
Wimsey is exceedingly rare on official signs. I’m quite proud to live somewhere that doesn’t take everything 100% seriously.
It’s something I point out to people who go to the park with me. The very definition of an explorable object.
I don’t mind being told “Yeah, that’s never getting approved because not enough people will understand what’s unique or explorable about it.” But I feel like I’m being gaslit being told it isn’t unique or interesting at all.
I have given my opinion about the sign, and we have determined that the sign does not meet criteria for approval.
Other people can discuss how they see this sign and it’s purpose, but it simply doesn’t meet criteria.
TL;DR
“This is interesting and whimsical.”
“Not according to my flow chart.”
It’s not clear exactly what sort of response you are hoping for here.
The only people that can say that it’s 100% unique are those that commissioned the sign.
I have seen warning signs that inject humour into them so that aspect does happen.
Just because something contains a joke does not instantly promote something that is otherwise un-notable to make it acceptable as a wayspot.
As with all submissions wayfinders will use their best judgement about the whole context of the object/location. Something that meets the bar for one person may not for another.
We would need to see the whole submission to see if this is wayspot worthy.
I mean… This was try #2.at getting some local history (because man-made natural features also don’t qualify)
It’s not the end of the world but it’s frustrating because (to me, I get it, it’s subjective, and I’m partially just venting a bit here about the implication that it isn’t) it’s in the top 3 least dull things I’ve submitted of 15 (most of which are dull things that more obviously fit the criteria being rubber-stamped).
But FWIW, here it is (roast me, lol)
I guess when you get to the root of my objection, maybe I’m approaching the problem wrong.
Would it be more appropriate to add a description to the (currently blank) local museum highlighting a few of the things one might learn there (as opposed to a tough to get buy-in on new POI)?
First we are help not to just criticise.
Sometimes the critique comes first but where possible help should follow 
I am going to move this to Nomination Support as that is the key place for this sort of interaction.
You are free to resubmit. But if you keep getting rejected, dont be discouraged. I suggest you highlight the humour. But personally i dont have high hope.
That is much easier to see now that we have the full nomination.
My first comment is that it is not clear whether it is the sign or the pond that is being nominated.
The title and photo relate directly to the sign, however in the description there is only a passing reference to the wording. This tends to happen when as a submitter you have become too deeply familiar with the nomination that you forget that total strangers will read it…..that’s the assistance we can offer
It is much easier if the title, photo and description tie together in a more obvious way, then the reviewer knows exactly what they are assessing.
If you are trying to submit the pond then the sign can act as single point anchor on the map. In this instance I would photograph the sign so it was taking up maybe 20-35% of the picture the rest being a nice picture of the pond. (Hopefully it’s next to the pond).
It is a warning sign so it’s never going to be great. But you can explain that in the supplementary information.
If the focus is the pond give its interesting history. I didn’t follow some of what you wrote as I am unfamiliar with snowmobile racing.
You go on to confuse further in the supplementary by implying it’s not a good place to swim. Which is it ?
A good place to swim ……
In the 1980s the area had a large snowmobile racing track, and this reservoir was built as part of the facilities. The track is long gone and the pond has been given a makeover to turn it from its winter use into a nice shady place to relax and have a cool swim in summer. The unusual sign adds to the relaxed atmosphere by adding a joke to the warnings that after dark the mythical alligators might get you.
This fits with the sign
Or a good place in winter in which case focus on that aspect.
Is it a good place to be social or to exercis.
Finally your supplementary photo shows neither the sign or the pond so doesn’t help locate the place. The sign should be in the supplementary photo but about 80-90% of the photo should show surrounding area.
You are in a small rural town.
Ok it looks to me like 2 baseball pitches in the blue square are these for general use? Each can be submitted separately. What is the building in the red circle? I guess the red rectangle is what remains of the snowmobile course? What is its use now?
Is there a golf club house?
Is there a separate sign for the regional park?
Is the small outdoor exercise area on 2nd Ave part of school grounds or separate?
Street view is old but is this park, play equipment and shelter all still there
Although the information about what might be in the database is becoming less accurate, as you are in a small rural area I expect it is ok for now.
In case you need it here is a picture of how the cells line up
I think there is quite a bit of potential here.
I’d probably vote for it under the title “Alligators Released After Dark” under exploration criteria. I bet many people don’t read that sign at all. Of course, a normal warning sign wouldn’t be eligible but I think the whimsy makes it a bit different.
Regarding being unfocused: As I said this is attempt #2, so effort got a little unfocused. Neither attempt was ever sent to community vote.
IMO, this is just a warning sign, even with the humor. I would reject it. But I got this to review yesterday, so maybe some people will think it meets criteria.
Ok it looks to me like 2 baseball pitches in the blue square are these for general use? Each can be submitted separately.
Yes. North one is a new gym in PoGo, the other is in voting.
What is the building in the red circle?
Park maintenance. Not good.
I guess the red rectangle is what remains of the snowmobile course? What is its use now?
Nothing really, they planted trees a few years ago, we used to fly kites there before that.
Is there a golf club house?
Yes, it’s in a cell with the existing first hole/golf course sign. Part of the patio is in a different cell but meh.
Is there a separate sign for the regional park?
There is a sign not yet a POI on the South Entrance. Not my favourite because the sign itself is out of date already. Is in voting though.
Is the small outdoor exercise area on 2nd Ave part of school grounds or separate?
I’m not 100% sure legally, so I’m operating under the assumption it’s part of the school.
Street view is old but is this park, play equipment and shelter all still there
I’m having far more success with this than I originally expected TBH. I figured maybe the park equipment and the shelters before I started exploring were the only obvious omissions.
LOL, though in Florida that would be a completely serious warning. Must have gotten past Emily due to the drawing.
That’s all great stuff.
You are doing well.
I expect the pond will keep falling foul of Emily. So a well constructed appeal will be needed.
