the staff replies do have an (s)
Thats why I am starting to get the feeling it was a false report on them. The city or parks didn’t request removal. While there are houses in the area, none of the gyms are on personal property.
1 Like
Instead of lumping it all together why not start small and find case where its most likely deleted by accident
There is not much we can talk but said that its deleted by property owner(s). But we dont know the detail
Hi @jedi4lif
I’ve merged your details about Jacksonville into the other thread so it’s all together.
2 Likes
After doing some digging around, it seems like these are the US sites that have had removals done:
- Camp Lejeune - Jacksonville, NC
- Camp Pendleton - Oceanside, CA
- Quantico USMC Base - Quantico, VA
- MCRD Parris Island - Beaufort, SC
There may be others, but right now, they seem to mostly be USMC bases and installations. This could help to narrow down who to contact in regards to this.
1 Like
It looks like everything south of 17 and lejuene blvd were removed with the exception of the sponsored Starbucks stop on base. I wonder if that portion of downtown Jacksonville was removed accidentally when the base was turned off. Have you reached out to base PAO?
1 Like
Have you got a community Ambassador for Pokemeon Go locally? Can they have a a good contact route to the games people?
I do agree that Public Affairs Office at the base seems a logical contact point to begin with, and to have a discussion to establish if they are involved in this request. You can’t address the issues until you know what they are.
Is the community able to make the most of what does remain. Developing a good reputation playing in those areas could help. Establishing alternative play areas to those no longer available and accepting that move whilst continuing to try and work to improve the situation would be a good way to progress.
Some time in the past year, there was a similar case in the UK, where local people were inquiring how churches, parks, council estates, businesses, etc., could possibly all had their Wayspots removed by a common entity. There simply was no ownership in common across all locations, and several people in positions of responsibility had declared that they did not submit any take-down requests.
If I remember correctly, it took rather a long time and lots of effort, but The Team eventually restored some of the Wayspots. They wouldn’t share their information, so it was incumbent upon the players to gather counter-facts: The secretary to the Parson could document that they did not object to pokestops on church property, etc.
Since The Team does not disclose details, it was never clear if there was any fraud, abuse, or malicious intent, or perhaps one requester or staffer was over-zealous.
I’m sorry I cannot recall the location for this past incident. I want to say it was something like ‘Sterling’.
This is incorrect. You do not have all the facts of that case. So, please refrain from spreading misinformation.
2 Likes
Its not everything. There are still a few stops downtown. Just not in the area i have focused. It could of been removed by accident. Thats why i am trying to bring the data to the table showing its not military. This would be a Niantic fix rather than a base issue.
Can you please help? If this was a military delete. The military does not govern this area. If it was by park/city offical or someone claiming to be. I can get written statement showing other wise. Just let me know what I need to do. I tried to provide as much data as possible showing the downtown Jacksonville area was affected and it was mostly parks.
We do our due diligence before taking actions. While our policies forbid us from sharing the details of our conversations with any third party, I can assure you that the requester had the authority to request this removal.
I understand your frustration but there is nothing we can do.
5 Likes
If you think there are some error, why not find 1 or 2 wayspot thats totally unrelated to the military in any way. Wayfarer ald have their statement. I doubt it will be reversed. If you want to prove that some got deleted by mistake, you nd to find one wayspot that you think got highest chance to be appealed. If even that fail, i suggest you start planning on submitting outside those area for future gathering.
I think the statement made by the team is quite clear that this has been carefully checked and there is no error. So it is better to accept that statement and take that as the starting point.
Nobody is saying to give up but in the short term it is better to accept the situation as it is and adapt play to fit that. Otherwise it will be constantly be frustrating.
The local wayfarer community can help by exploring the areas that are active and prioritise looking for suitable new wayspots there. Its not ideal but at least it will enable the best to be made of what is available. These are positives that you can do and it is useful to focus energy on them.
2 Likes
We know you can’t provide specific details of who requested the takedowns, but would you potentially be able to throw us a bone by confirming or denying if all of the takedowns listed by @DTrain2002 in the linked post came from the same source, or if they were all from different sources? This doesn’t directly give away any identity information, but if they are indeed linked, it might just help people in figuring out who needs to be negotiated with.
If you aren’t able to tell us that, fair enough, but I figure it can’t hurt to at least ask the question.
2 Likes
Unfortunately, I can’t share those details. Thanks for understanding.
2 Likes
I applied a few weeks ago, so hopefully we will have an Ambassador for the area. I’ll be taking time tomorrow to visit a few places, would a letter certifying they did not submit a request of removal and would like them reinstated be enough. If that’s the case we can go around collecting them pretty quickly and submit them to any official email.
I think the PO would have to ask for the removals to be reversed. I don’t think anyone but the PO can ask for restoration.
I dont think that will work. Unless you find the person who make request.
Thought experiment. Imagine it was the state governor who requested the removal. They have the authority to do this, but as Scopely cannot tell you who requested the removals, you would have to track all the way from local ownership up to the state governor. Anything less, you can’t know you’ve found the person who made the request.
Also, if you get people to sign letters certifying they didn’t submit the request, you definitely haven’t found the person who did, because it’s definite that someone did.