If everything is broad why have guidelines at all? Set rules for adult and sensitive locations and schools and let people turn every square block into a six gym area.
At the heart of this issue is really what are pokestops supposed to represent? Interesting or important parts of your community or just something that someone likes.
That is the current thread through all of this. That’s the only issue that needs answering. It would settle 99% of all issues like this now and in the future without being specific.
Everything passes, that’s not a reason to not stand for what you believe or try to improve something.
The percentage of reviews is not relevant as to how they are reviewed.
I probably see a similar number of trail marker signs to assess if they meet acceptable criteria. That doesn’t affect how I assess them.
I’ve agreed with pretty much everything I’ve seen from you, except this.
With this mindset, the suburbs of NSW would be filled with identical wayspots. Every disc golf course would have umpteen wayspots, one per hole. Every tiny little division in USA suburbs would be a wayspot, all virtually identical.
You are asking players and reviewers to ignore what a large proportion think is coal, because it doesn’t matter if you can help get one rejected when another dozen pop up and get accepted by lazy reviewers, friends of the submitter, alt accounts (as if) etc.
Some clarifications from Niantic appear to have only come about because of heated (and repeated) discussions on these forums (and the previous one).
Where have I said I would accept these.
I haven’t. ( unless I have mistyped)
My votes would be counting to towards reject for most of these. So I don’t see how you think I would be helping these to be accepted.
That’s how voting works.
If groups are colluding to accept then that is a totally different issue.
Perhaps you should play something else, unironically. You draw value from this game if it acts as a tour guide. You are in dismay when your tour guide leads you to things you deem uninteresting.
I can confidently say: The majority of the Pokémon Go player base does not feel this way. They draw value from raiding, battling, catching.
I have never, nor anyone else I have played with, expressed any lamentation that a pokestop was not as interesting as it could be.
This is where your balance is skewed, you think less (mediocre) pokestops is better for the game, I argue the opposite: More pokestops means the game is more accessible, thus more players, creating community and most importantly for Scopely, a larger pool of people to potentially spend money.
There is absolutely no person, you included, that thinks along the lines: “wow we only have beautiful, unique, hyper local pokestop! The game is now better so I will spend more money!”
That isn’t what I meant so apologies if that is how it came across.
You appear to be saying ‘just let wayfarer reviewers review however, without guidelines’, on a contentious issue and where it is known that lots of wayspots will get accepted while a significant number of wayfarers think they are coal. This position is tantamount to accepting the coal, even if your own reviews are to reject it.
Pokemon Go was never about exploration. It doesn’t matter in the slightest what objects are in the Pokestop photo. They’ll function the exact same, whether the picture is of the Mona Lisa or of a garbage can on the side of the road. All that matters is that there are Pokestops and gyms to use.
I don’t care how interesting they are because that is up to the person. I can’t decide that for everyone nor can anyone else.
I don’t want less pokestops I want pokestops that are meaningful. Do you want every traffic sign to be one? That would be more and as a result better right?
I lament nothing about this game. Its player base has issues but that’s another issue entirely.
Pokémon as a game has always been about exploration. Most of pokemon go media and videos show exploration. Not rolling to a McDonald’s and going home.
Correct me if I’m wrong with sources but isn’t this game about getting out and exploring with other people and meeting friends? How does the game benefit from meeting at the beginning of a development?
I want there to be as many as possible poke stops. I love seeing a park with twenty. It’s not quantity it’s quality and based on the guidelines there should be significance to what’s chosen.
I will never accept normal manhole cover. I figured most people also wont. Unless its poke lid thing like in japan. If its accepted because voting ring, its another issue. But wayfarer ald told us to use our best judgement. Since wayfarer refuse to give their statement, i am assuming wayfarer dont want to flatly reject all building sign and give each sign its own merit. Thats what i will do.
They have guidelines that are applied to these and many other objects. They are broad but they are not to be ignored. I find them very effective. They allow me to assess things that are routine and things that I have never seen before.
If reviewers don’t follow guidelines then they are unlikely to maintain a good rating. If submitters don’t follow guidelines and try to fit a square peg into a round hole that will come to light. But mostly they will find it frustrating and disappointing.
A separate issue is around the lack of alignment between acceptance and removal criteria. It is frustrating to see something that shouldn’t have passed unable to be removed. It’s linked to this but it is separate.
You shouldn’t assume what someone else means about their silence.
Given past issues and only through persistent discussion about why something was bad for the game it changed. Assuming no action is confirmation is a has been proven wrong in the past.
Whether you would accept a manhole cover isn’t the point. I wouldn’t accept a development sign but people do.
So if everyone just approved manhole covers you would be like” well I guess it’s okay”?
The point is the broad guidelines should make clear what at its essence what’s a pokestop supposed to represent in the real world.
If it’s a generic thing place or building for something a corporation built why limit generic businesses? If it’s not inheritly unique or special in general or to a community, why not manhole covers?
Manhole covers provide more to a community than a development sign at an intersection of two major roads.
I don’t think we need to wander down some of the notions given about these.
The question seems to be is the current framework enough.
Whatever reasons are provided, the object needs to be assessed and if it doesn’t meet criteria as a place and object designed for that purpose then it doesn’t pass and the criteria have done their job.
No matter how everybody thinks, everyone has their opinion which I respect. I do think we need at least a message from the team to give this wide discussion a stop. We are going more and more off-topic. What even was it about? A builders sign? Look where we are now? I am reading manhole covers, other examples, criteria, reviewing.
We clearly need some kinds of message, look at the reactions flowing in on this topic, everybody is sharing their opinion and reacting to others posts, which is fine on it’s own, everbody can react ofcourse, but we need to put some limit to it. We are going very far now.
You shouldnt make assumption about other people as well then. What make you think people accept manhole cover. I told you that i will never accept normal manhole cover unless there are some artistic value to it like poke lid in japan.
Anyway wayfarer is essentially community review. Thats what i am doing. I am not saying that i will accept every builder sign i see.wayfarer are told to give your best judgement. I am just giving it a chance.