LOL
All right. I’m done trying to understand the flip-flopping rules of Wayfarer. Why even have a list of acceptance and rejection criteria if people aren’t going to follow it and nothing is going to be done about people not following it?
You’ve got people who have been trying to follow these obscure rules for the past 7 years, who have been actively trying to help newcomers in their city understand what’s acceptable and what’s not, and then they see all this stuff from the rejection list get approved and become even more confused as to why the rule makers choose to ignore it.
People come in here and ask “Why did my eligible submission get denied, it’s on the list of acceptance criteria?” And the mob responds “Well you didn’t do a good job of describing why it should be accepted.” And then they ask “Why did this apartment sign with no description get approved?” and get similar responses to those in this thread, making excuses as to why it did and why it’s not going to be removed.
I had the same issue a few months ago trying to get a unique NON-CHAIN restaurant approved and questioned the inconsistency here after the appeal was rejected and people were more than happy to tell me why it wasn’t a good submission (it did eventually get approved after passing a second appeal), but now here a mass-produced chain restaurant is all fine and dandy, because just MAYBE it’s the only hang-out restaurant around (it’s not) and won’t be removed because oh well.
I’ve had close to 500 nominations approved since I started doing this in late 2019, with very few rejections. My Wayfarer rating is at 36,986 points and even prior to this new rating system, I was consistently at the highest rating for agreements. If something would clearly meet the listed rejection criteria in the Criteria tab on the Wayfarer website, I don’t nominate it or accept it in voting. If it’s questionable and not specifically mentioned, I may try to nominate it just to see what happens, but if it fails I’ll usually just let it go. In voting, I’ll use the skip button if I’m not sure. If I know it 100% meets the listed criteria, I don’t give up until my nomination goes through.
I don’t dig through the forums to try and find all the obscure rules that are made in here about what’s acceptable (e.g. trail markers that are nothing but dots on a tree) or what’s unacceptable (e.g. disc golf tees that have all kinds of writing on them, essentially the same thing as a trail marker). I did a disc golf course once, five years ago. Pretty much every one was approved through Niantic voting (yes, it had the Niantic balloon logo next to it when it was in voting) or through appeal. So I was conflicted when I discovered threads on the forums where people were vehemently against individual tees, enough that I decided I never wanted to attempt it again, seeing how people actively report them, and, unlike this CHAIN FRANCHISE FROM THE REJECTION CRITERIA LIST that I reported here, they are rapidly removed. I’ve also gotten to the point where I’ll reject them in voting just to go with the flow.
I guess from now on, if I see a clearly ineligible Wayspot that’s not on private property, not in a dangerous location or not non-existent, I’m just going to ignore it. I’ll 100% reject it if I see it in voting, but if it gets approved, oh well. I’ll gladly live with a stop at Burger King or Olive Garden (that represents the restaurants themselves and not a piece of art or picnic area at the locations) if that eventually happens. When these types of Wayspots are allowed to stay, they’re open invitations for others like them.
Rant over. Carry on. Tell me why I’m wrong. It’s what people on the forums love to do.
