I legitimately don’t even know what to make of this one. What on Earth are they talking about? The marker is eligible, but they reject it anyway? They don’t know how this marker aids exploration? You go in the direction the marker is pointing! Do they seriously need each marker to come with a written manual underneath it? And I gave them several links with information about the trail in the appeal notes, which they apparently didn’t see.
I would hope this appeal rejection can get overturned.
Look on the bright side 
At least this wasn’t a boiler plate response such as “This remarkable unique cat sculpture is just a normal sculpture of no significance”, but the appeal reviewer put effort into writing an explanation.
It’s a shame that the explanation doesn’t make any sense, but it probably did to the person who wrote it.
I think this happen because there are people who put sticker to make wayspot
Which we’ve already been over in my other topic. The conclusion that was reached is if the sticker marker is already visible on StreetView images from far back in the past, then it’s obviously not placed there just for the sake of creating a wayspot. And this particular marker can be seen as far back as 2014 (as explained in the appeal notes), years before Pokemon Go and Wayfarer even existed. So that argument does not apply in this scenario.
