- Wayspot Title: Oak Ridge Cemetery
- Location (lat/lon): 41.653301,-88.653470
- City: Sandwich
- Country: US
- Screenshot of the Rejection Email (do not include your personal information):
- Additional Information (if any): This an an active cemetery still in use with ongoing burial services. It isn’t right to encourage gameplay in this sensitive location. Please observe the following link for proof: Memorials in Oak Ridge Cemetery - Find a Grave
- There are also 4 other nearby Wayspots located within these cemetery grounds. They are all located near recent burial sites. Located at following coordinates:
- Cross Memorial (41.653025,-88.652182)
- Ainsworth Tomb Memorial (41.652324,-88.652869)
- Cannon Hero Memorial (41.652056,-88.654505)
- War Memorial (41.653512,-88.653831)
- Please re-evaluate these wayspots’ eligibility.
I also feel that it is disrespectful to play Pokemon Go in a cemetery - so I don’t. I do follow published guidelines in reviewing and reporting, and do not believe these meet removal criteria. But it is up to staff to review this appeal, not the rest of us.
If I feel that the property management would not want game locations there, I will find someone in charge to contact to let them know these exist. The property manager can request the locations be removed if they are bothersome.
That example doesn’t make it right in general.
My starting point is that there is a difference between an area of a cemetery where burials/internments are still taking place (not suitable for wayspots) and old areas which are no longer active (suitable for wayspots).
It doesn’t matter if a gravestone/memorial is for someone famous - if it is surrounded by plots that are currently being made us of, I would not submit it. You do however tend to find that these are in inactive areas.
Zorgvlied Cemetery seems to be actively promoting itself as a place to explore, which isn’t something I see in the UK except with no-longer-actively-in-use cemeteries, so that does seem to make it a little but special. I don’t think Oak Ridge Cemetery has this.
I get what you’re saying. I don’t play in cemeteries either. But I do feel at least a little something about others playing in them - especially when they contain a few of my passed friends and family. Others might feel similar.
I am regularly nearby this cemetery and witness (in-game) Pokemon Go players make a midnight visit to play with the gym in this cemetery. I just figured Wayspots in areas that might create any reasonable objection deserve a re-evaluation. The guidelines on these cases seem a bit shifty.
Good point about the property management. But it might be a little challenging to get a hold of them between finding the hidden phone number and hoping they understand the concept of all of this. Small town, infrastructure like this runs on an aging skeleton crew.
Thanks for the appeal @RoachBagg ,
We have removed these Wayspots, and you should see the changes reflected soon.
We stand by our decision to not retire these Wayspots and they do not meet removal criteria.
Thanks,
I actually would prefer cemeteries to be ineligible, but I think most people tend to think that the “famous people” part is more important than “a sensitive location” (as most people want more stops)
In The Netherlands we recycle our graves, after the mandatory first years, graves are cleared, and reused (unless the family extends the period). So basically we don’t have inactive parts of a cemetery (with some exceptions)
I can’t agree with that, because of this cemetery among others. It is definitely no longer active and also a place that people are encouraged to explore and spend time in. Very few of the wayspots here are for famous people, but are for features that have been added to aid exploration.
There cannot be a blanket rule of “no wayspots in cemeteries”.
[Edited to replace link to photosphere with link to streetview]