Guten Tag,
Ich verstehe das Kinder geschützt werden sollen aber ich verstehe nicht warum an schulen keine pokestops erlaubt sind.
Viele andere Orte wo sich Kinder aufhalten sind pokestops wie zum Beispiel Spielplätze oder Sportplätze.
Hello and Welcome,
Schools are places that Children are left being looked after by other people, they are not places where large groups of players should be hanging around unless its on school business.
Playgrounds will usually have a parent or guardian looking after the child. They are also usually located in areas that are to be used by other members of the public (parks etc).
The Final reason is that they are in Niantics “Definitely Not” criteria. It is their game, their rules. As Wayfarers we play by those rules.
Also cafes, restaurants, shops, on the street, on footpaths, near murals, in parks, next to monuments. In fact, everywhere where you can have a wayspot you have find children. (There is an explicit ineligibility for adult-only locations).
Therefore, because a space allows children or a space is used by children does not itself mean it cannot be a wayspot. What is strictly forbidden is places which are schools and other locations (scout facilities) which are specifically for children. Playground are for families, as are soft-play. Parents don’t drop young children at playgrounds and then walk away for 6 hours.
Honestly I think they do, it depends on the country/place. I was definitely going to the playground alone from age 5+ and I walked to elementary school every day. But that’s neither here nor there
Um my local park most of the children are minus parents.
I usually phrase the ineligible locations as places children are left in the care of others besides a parent or guardian.
I was the same but then I am a 70s kid so we where allowed to do lot’s of things that would probably get parents arrested today 
2 Likes
I think that has mostly to do with the fact that Niantic does not want to be associated with kids not paying any attention during school.
I have a (grandfathered in) Arena near me that is a sculpture that is technically on the schools premises - but it’s so far off any building that no student can access it during lessons. While i wouldnt submit a new spot for stuff like this, i also wouldnt report this spot due to the fact that noone did for 10+ years (and it’s like 2m off a busy road while being inaccessible from the school itself)
Niantic has established a policy of disapproving Wayspot submissions for schools and facilities exclusively for minors under 18, though they have not disclosed the specific reasons for this. In such cases, providing concrete reasons could lead to interpretations like “this location is acceptable based on those reasons” or conversely, “this specific location outside the facility is unacceptable based on those reasons.”
If we were to speculate, I believe the following two points could be the reasons:
One is the belief that children should focus on the education and activities taking place at school or the facility while they are there, and should not be playing Niantic games. The other is that placing Wayspots could interfere with the operation or security of the school or facility. Players will head towards the Wayspot. If it doesn’t significantly detour their usual commute or shopping route, players will choose paths with more Wayspots. In some cases, this could lead to players repeatedly loitering near school or facility entrances as part of their gameplay loop.
In any case, the reasons haven’t been made clear, and I don’t think they ever will be. As stated in the Criteria Clarification Collection, locations within the grounds, along boundary fences, and on structures attached to them should be treated as ineligible.
1 Like
This conversation was had here a while ago and some people where strong in the opinion that unless you had school business you should not be “near” school grounds. I would find this impossible as my house is about 20m from the school drive. I am often getting in the car, working in the front garden when the kids are going to / leaving school.
I mentioned that I was once walking past a school, needing a break and knowing their was a Gym on the opposite side of the road I stopped. Noticed a Raid was about to happen. Looked round it was obviously a group of parents that where waiting at the school gates
This is why I understand the “Not on School Grounds” rule but hate the “why are you near a school” argument…
3 Likes
The sensibility of that rule depends a lot on the individual setting of the school. Is the School in a busy part of the city? Then the rule is kinda pointless, just like the SFPRP one for buildings that are in the center of the village or whatever. Especially if the PoI is outside of whatever building. People walk there no matter what, so there should realistically not be a diffrence.
And yes, i do know that those are the rules. I just think they can be ridiculous and confusing.
They are neither ridiculous nor confusing, unless people are not reading the rules.
Anywhere on school property including the external boundary - not eligible.
Anywhere on SFPRP including the external boundary - not eligible.
4 Likes
Just did a quick search for like 10 schools in my region and already found one that has a legal spot within the same cell, kids can access it during class without a problem. The spot is on the street right next to the school, but not attached to the school in any way. It is positioned correctly, and a valid object. It’s an Arena even.
Not to mention all the schools with multiple spots in the next cell.
Also, it’s impossible to actually know who owns what without going through legal paperwork. You found a trailmarker in a forest that is publicly accessible? Forests can be privately owned, and there could be a single family home somewhere on that property. Sculpture on a walkway? Still within the borders of the single family home, even if the walkway is accessible by the public and not fenced off at all. The only way to truely check who owns the land is to ask the government for documentation, and they probably don’t give that info unless you have a good reason.
Also, i have a house near me that has two entrances, both to the road. One is with a single letterbox, one has 3 letterboxes. They share the same address tho, so it is the same house.
If your response to the last one is “I think it might be valid, but i wouldn’t submit a PoI there just to be safe” that’s confirmation that the rule is confusing btw.
Wayspots being near things has never been a reason for rejecting them. Your first two paragraphs are strawman arguments.
You don’t need legal paperwork to know who owns what. If it looks like a frog, treat it as if it is a frog.
Trailmarker on a public footpath in a forest? No-one can legitimately treat that as SFPRP. Not least because it’s not residential. You can keep trying to come with examples that are extremely unlikely edge cases, but I just don’t understand why.
1 Like
Also, there is the “Criteria Clarification Collection”.
The Rules on the official site are in no way clear if they need a clarification forum category. You can read the rules 100 times, without that category you won’t know whats actually allowed. for example, the criteria page mentions “Unique local buisnesses” and does not offer any explanation on what that is. Any non-chain-buisness is technically unique and local.
There are plenty of grey area in wayfarer , thats why wayfarer let local reviewer decide which one unique enough to be approved. At the same time reviewer also can report any wayspot that they think got incorrectly accepted. Thats just how check and balance happening.
1 Like
I don’t see this as confusion, this is allowing local reviewers to decide using their cultural knowledge of the area whether it should be accepted.
Having 3 letterbox for a single family private residence property seems extremely unlikely so how does the postman choose which to use?
We often get what was a large house that has now split in to flats, it has the same address such as No 48 Wayfarer Street but will have something along “Flat A” to distinguish them. In this case it is not a single family residence.
If their is a 1 house, 1 family, 3 letter box property that is eligible it is down to the submitter to prove that is the case.
It would be impossible to list which businesses would be included due to the different types of shops that exist in different countries.
For me in the UK, every high street will have at least 1 charity shop usually more so they are not unique. If a country had 2 in total then they would be unique.
There is another thread at this moment where a store that sells “crystals, g.u.n.s, and knives” and the poster sounds like this is normal for the US. This just wouldn’t happen in the UK (and if it did would definitely be an adult only location).
Being common should imho not matter. Waymarkers along a track are common globally. Churches are common globally. Murals and Graffiti are common (in cities) globally. There even are memorials that are common (for example “Stolpersteine” in germany, each one is about one person/family but they all are the same size, color and shape) or just the cross of jesus christ, which is common globally.
Better criteria would be: Is the store a chain? - Deny. If not, is it good for socializing and/or sports? - Approve.
Something along those lines.
Or just give a few examples that should apply just about everywhere.
(Just to make this clear, the uniqueness would still persist, as in its not McDonalds etc. or a sports chain)
Like local restaurants are already allowed. I’ll take a wild guess and say there is a local restaurant for every charity shop in GB xD
I am discussing locations that would normally not meet criteria but if it was extremely rare it could reach criteria for explore.
Bus Stops are not eligible but lets say 1 still exists from the 1820s when they where introduced in London that would be eligible for “explore”.
McDs does reach the “Social” criteria but due to them being the total opposite of “unique” they are rejected.
These are not accepted as themselves. They are a proxy for the section of Trail. The trail meets criteria for exercise, explore and probably social.
Due to age / style and that they allow exploration of Faith as well as being social they are obvious.
I have a simplified definition between Murals and Graffiti.
I would Reject Grafiti.
Authorised Murals I would accept. They may be common but usually individually unique.
I used Charity Shop as an example has they would not normally be acceptable but could be if extremely rare in your country.
It would depend on the definition. If you mean an independent restaurant owned and operated by a local person then I would say No.
In the UK a Restaurant is usually an eat in location so do local “take away” businesses count?
Each branch of McDs is local to somewhere?
Among the criteria for acceptance “Famous transit stations” are specifically mentioned.
And i just realized that the german translation for this is pretty bad, cause “Beliebte Transitstationen” translates back to “Popular transit stations”. Which is certainly NOT the same. Every bus stop in inner London is popular (as in lots of people use it), but very few are famous.
And i’d say a Pub can qualify as a restaurant, as in you can sit down and buy something to eat and drink there. Takeaway food places shoud not usually qualify, as they arent good social places.