Just looking at this area, the OP may be basing this somewhat on this Wayspot:
43.246456,-88.284576
I have to ask myself “Who is Michael S. Hall? What was his significance to this area?”
43.246456,-88.284576
I think people are missing the magic words of encouraging exploration and excercise. The title names the park and person’s name for a specific location. The title also focuses on the fact it is a trail bench… ie hiking trail which promotes exercise and it happens to have a nice view of the lake which you can see in the supporting photo and is verifiable with the map view.
This is overkill in finding ways to deny good faith noms in the spirit of the game when the point of the game is to favor people moving and exercising and enjoying their community parks.
1 Like
But we have to highlight that previously accepted waypoints should not be used to legitimise current nominations.
1 Like
The other memorial bench was literally just approved within the last week or two in the same park and nominated by the same person as this one… so that is what I mean by inconsistency.
It should have never been accepted in the first place then, based on the clarification.
the other bench in the photo has the same engraving. The family paid for side by side benches as a donation to the park.
Again the point of this nom is to promote hiking the entire trail(s) in the park which means trail markers, maps, and memorial trail benches to highlight the entire trail.
This is a new park for me and I prefer when the trails are fully marked. When new to a park like this. you can feel lost or get turned around in the woods. You do not know if there are benches to rest along the way. It is taking days / weeks to learn this entire park and all its trails. It is more welcoming and less risky to explore a new park like this when someone has done this work for you already! This game should not just be what you can spin driving through the parking lot.
And again, the criteria clarification notes that they are not eligible unless proving the person is of importance. Benches do not promote exercise, but rest. And if all the benches look similar in the area, they aren’t anything worth exploring.
Wayfarer is game-agnostic; it provides the map for the games, but the games decide which Wayspots appear based on their density/inclusion rules. Wayfarer has criteria that is to be followed, which the games do not need to follow.
Not everyone that is doing Wayfarer is driving around in their car finding things, or spinning a stop from a parking lot for PoGo. We have many that love going out to areas where cars aren’t permitted and finding new POIs to nominate that may meet criteria. I love when I find a new POI to nominate at a local park or a new mural downtown, even at one that has a good deal of Wayspots already; these areas are walk/bike heavy, with little traffic, and some areas that are off-limits to any motor vehicles.
It is not “overkill in finding ways to deny”.
I explained why this was correctly rejected as not meeting criteria and I gave suggestions on how it could be changed to improve its chances of being accepted.
The criteria states that a bench in itself in not eligible unless it meets other criteria and this nomination has not shown this to be the case.
The OP states that it is the View that he is nominating but this is not clear with what he has shown. In these cases the View should be shown. It would be then down to the Reviewers to decide whether it is significant. Personally I would not take every bench at the side of a lake to be significant, from a previous discussion I know some would so even with the changes we could not be 100% sure it would be approved, all I can say with changes it would have a much better chance.
Of course there will be inconsistancies, that what happens when you ask random groups of people to review.
If everything was an obvious Yes / No as you make out then there would be no need to send to multiple people. Just send to 1 person with 1 question “Acceptable? Yes / No”
1 Like
According to your narrow limited standards only places like The Mayflower landing , The Alamo or Golden Gate Bridge are important. But so many wayfarer stops are about exercise and our parks!!! If only the official park entrance sign counted there would be no incentive to explore the park. And the term park here is much broader than your neighborhood park with a playground or baseball field.
You clearly do not value hiking trails but for some players that may be their main way to play the game! And ‘views’ that count should not just be of mount rushmore or niagra falls. This is a lake where people live, boat, fish etc and also this park (with lake views) has 8-9 cabins and a rustic chapel and wedding venue etc.
Benches on a trail are to rest for a moment while hiking!!! Some people may not risk a hike if they cannot be sure of rest spots along the way.
We have outlined why this bench isn’t eligible with the current info. Please go back and reread what others have said, as well as the criteria.
You may have gotten lucky with the Michael S Hall bench getting accepted, but don’t expect that to happen in the future, since these benches do not meet criteria currently.
I have explained enough at this point, so I will be moving on.
I love how people sudenly know everything about me as soon as I state something that doesn’t agree with them.
I am not against trails at all, current health issues mean that I am not on them as often as I would like but you add every bench, every sign with an arrow and anything else you find and you will get the city folks complaining that it’s not fair as their isn’t enough stops where they live 
As for significant, I would be looking for something different to all the other 20 benches around the same lake.
As for Parks, that is off topic and for another post.
‘a good number’ of stops in this park are accessible by car! The more remote hiking trails are not marked yet. The Hall memorial bench is also not about the individual. It marks the sledding hill which is one of the amenities at this park. identifying the memorial bench helps identify this location in the park! it is not rocket science. The more places to mark in these park helps to create start and stopping places for routes, it also attracts more players to the park and helps players replenish game supplies while playing and exploring the park.
Hi,
Can everyone please remain respectful and take time to consider replies or I will have to place this in slow mode.
1 Like
You have made it clear in the thread that it’s not about the Memorial but it wasn’t clear in your nomination.
I have explained why it was rejected and made suggestions that could improve the chance that a future nomination may be accepted.
Due to location you don’t need to worry about my “narrow limited standards” as it won’t be me reviewing
Reviewers rejected, appeal rejected. If you don’t make any changes it’s likely to be rejected again.
It seems that you don’t want to listen to the suggestions myself and others have given so as this has now got the attention of the Ambassador I am going to walk away.
Good luck with any future nominations.
I’m going to sum up a few points.
@mainstead
You posted here originally as you wanted to Appeal the appeal. There is no such process.
What we can do is help you to see and understand why you got the result that you did.
I understand how frustrating this all appears to be - we all only submit nominations that we believe to be eligible and yet all of us will have experienced rejections. We have appeals but if that also returns as a rejection then we need to accept and move on.
It hasnt been the message that you wanted to hear but it is the message that you need to hear. The experienced wayfinders have offered reasons and they have offered solutions as a way forward. They are looking to try and get you success.
Now that you have said that the neighborouring bench was accepted I can see the confusion more clearly. You were lucky with that bench perhaps it was presented slightly differently but it got through and its unlikely to be removed. However what we see on the map does not make something else acceptable.
I think the best thing to do is to think about a different approach to this bench. Decide if you want to present it as a view - you will need to show that view or if you want to present it as a significant point to stop on a trail. The later I think will be difficult when there is a bench right next to it. For the view you are going to have try and get a good angle - Crouching down low sometimes works. But decide on what 1 criteria you want to focus on and stick to that.
If you want to come back for advice on the new pictures people will be happy to help.
1 Like
I am not a fan of benches along a trail as Wayspots, unless they are independently a destination worthy of exploration. However, @Gendgi, whom I respect immensely, is. If you resubmit, you could try some of his feedback from in other places, and explain how this is important to the trail - regardless of who the memorial is for, and whether you can completely capture the view there. Instead of focusing on the clarification, go back to the basic criteria. Explain how the presence of this bench keeps people moving along the trail, encouraging exercise and exploration. The prettier the photo of the bench you can get, the more likely reviewers are going to lean towards, “Of course this should be a Wayspot.”
actually I have gotten something else approved here after an appeal was denied.
I will add the detailed description and supporting info originally supplied with the nom. I personally am not interested in touristy places or high traffic places. I prefer remote hikes in nature and like to have the game include these places.