Why was it previously possible to log into the game and see a bunch of interesting and/or previously unknown places and objects? Why are the surroundings now mostly filled with playgrounds, sports fields, and typical eateries? Why has “there are no PokéStops in my area” become a justification for nominations? Why has “the more the better" paradigm become more influential than rules and common sense? Why is it possible to vehemently defend nominations with bad names and crooked photos with the excuse “we’ll edit them later”? Why does someone who follows the rules and common sense and doesn’t allow every nomination to be approved become a victim of community aggression?
Wayfarer nomination is reviewed by community. Thats why review circle might happen but it doesnt make it norm nor make it eligible. Anything ineligible accepted by review circle is just living on borrowed time and whoever in review circle is subject to abuse ladder system. It will stay until someone report them. While its true that some people have “the more the better” mindset, this forum wont support that.
It is precisely someone who report them and becomes a victim of aggression from the community.
Report can be done anonimously unless you tell people, noone will know
Wayspots are, and always have been, focussed around meeting one of three core criteria - Social, Exploration and Exercise.
Playgrounds are definitely great for exercise and social (parents meet up, chat, chill).
Sports grounds are de-facto great for exercise
Eateries are where people meet up to have a good social time
These aren’t the sort of wayspots that it is reasonable to complain about. There are many others that are far more dubious than this.
I have no idea how it is possible to become a victim by reviewing. No-one knows how you have reviewed. You can reject every dodgy wayspot you come across and that information is only between you and Niantic.
1 Like
Hey so I don’t get this question? They are eligible as a great place to socialize / a great place to exercise.
1 Like
…unless you are a well-known Wayfarer in your country. 
Still doesnt make people know that you are the one doing report. Unless you tell people or make public appeal on rejected wayspot removal, noone can be sure 100% who make the removal report.
I can imagine that with wayspot removals, it could be possible for people to work out (or assume) who is reporting the wayspots, if someone is already on record with their opinions. Often that assumption would be wrong.
Very different to wayspot reviews though.
2 Likes
As to the subject of this thread, my own queue of nominations includes an ornate marker for a nature reserve, murals, national cycle routes, national trails, local trails, rocks (!), community noticeboards, plaques, playgrounds, pavilions, sports arenas, benches with views, historic boundary markers, cafes, historic information boards and more.
Some of these some people would undoubtedly think are not interesting and not quality, but it is a major exaggeration to say that interesting and quality nominations have finished.
Its only possible if that person give clue about it in the first place. And the best other can do is guess.
With recent import in indonesia, there are many ineligible wayspot around me, i cant be bothered to report all of them. But if i do report, noone will know but niantic.
1 Like
Nonsense. I don’t know how it is in other countries. In our country, 90% of playgrounds are empty. Every apartment building has one. They are monotonous and boring. In the best case, the mother will send the child to play alone and will periodically check on him from the apartment window. People sit and chat more often on benches near the entrance to an apartment building than on a playground. In theory, the playgrounds have a mission of socialization, but in reality they do not fulfill it. Playgrounds are popular only in public parks and squares because they are much more pleasant to be in than a playground in the courtyard of a residential complex.
By definition, yes. In reality, they are also empty. Mostly small children use them as playgrounds (again, without their parents), and it’s extremely rare to see pensioners there.
As far as I know, Wayfarer’s mission is to create the most interesting, family-friendly, and accurate representation of the real-world.
Regarding the “accurate and interesting” presentation, neither playgrounds nor sports fields are almost always interesting. And they are almost never places for socialization in real-world.
According to the rules, an ordinary business must have real grounds to become a nominee. In almost 6,000 nominations reviewed, I have never seen such grounds. Nobody describes what makes the cuisine unique. Nobody mentions the historical importance of the establishment. Absolutely nothing.
Often the objects of socialization conflict with the rules or are simply not interesting. In reality, people often socialize in hospital queues. However, they can’t be nominated because there are ambulances on hospital grounds, which can be obstructed by a group of players.
Another example is a bus stop. Ours looks similar to this …
A lot of people constantly communicate and meet on them. They’re a constant source of communication and networking for tons of people, but there’s nothing unique or interesting about them. They’re more popular than playgrounds or sports fields. But no one in their right mind would nominate them because they’re unpresentable.
So, do you think it’s right that when you enter the game, you won’t be able to find anything interesting, simply because all the available space has been taken up by playgrounds, sports fields, and cafes? And even if something did fit on the map, you won’t be able to find it simply because of the huge amount of background garbage in the form of the same previously mentioned objects.
If you cant see why those are eligible, i suggest you to reread wayfarer criteria.
3 Likes
Hey, so I want to provide one quick insight on my opinion.
Still a playground, still serve its purpose. I don’t see what’s wrong.
Does not change the fact playground is still a GREAT place for socializing and a great place for children to exercise.
I disagree again, parents actively seek out this specfic location called playground to drop children nearby.
Does not change the fact it is a sport ground. Does not change the fact it is a great place to exercise.
If playground and sport field is not interesting, is not a great place for people to hang out, then I failed to see your whole point because you are completely going off Wayfarer criteria.
It is another topic and does not in anyway related to the three you are talking about. It is not eligible for a wayspot.
You don’t go Bus Stop to socialize, you don’t go Bus stop to exercise.
You go to Playground to exercise as a kid, or socialize with other parent in that area.
I recommend you read the Wayfarer criteria and Wayfarer Criteria Clarification.
1 Like
I think you are too aggresive in trying to remove eligible wayspot. Just because you dont like it, doesnt make it ineligible. Please reread wayfarer criteria.
Then I went to nominate my home. Family is the main social unit. We also eat in the kitchen and socialize. It’s accessible to a limited number of people (my family), which is also permitted to be nominated. What am I doing wrong? What’s the difference between a residential complex with playgrounds accessible only to residents of the complex and my kitchen? The only difference between them is the number of people. If you think it violates the private property rule, yes. But there’s rule 10 in the deviation criteria, which doesn’t have anything specific. However, according to him, I can say that almost all playgrounds and sports fields do not correspond to the mission of Wayferer.
Then read rule number 10 of the rejection criteria.
This is exactly why people need to read wayfarer criteria. Single Family Private Residential Property is included in ineligible list. Anything on SFPRP is deemed ineligible even though you buy famous art and put it in your kitchen
As the rejection criteria are not numbered, can you please paste the text of the rejection item you are referring to as #10