Of course it is relevant. Why is there a whole conversation if you just going to ignore all of it?
Your OP was regards to the single waypoint and why it had been removed.
That was discussed and you was informed that the waypoint met the removal criteria.
The conversation then went on to you requesting a change of criteria.
Aaron has replied answering the OP.
It would not be up to 1 member of staff to make policy changes.
Wait for the next AMA and make a suggestion then for the policy change.
Good Luck.
We read every single post/comment on the forum. Hope that answers your question.
It does. Thank you
I think this is wrong. The footpath around is pedestrian and is part of the roundabout. The sculpture is meant to be looked at from there. The poi is the roundabout of which both sculpture and path are part of.
It doesn’t really matter where the object is meant to be viewed from, the criterion is that you need to be able to get to and remain at the object safely. In this case, there is clearly no way to do that.
There are marked crosswalks on every street crossing around the object, which indicates that if this object were designed to be visited on the island, there would be a crosswalk leading to it.
The base of the object is extremely slanted, so even if someone were able to make it over safely, standing on it would prove difficult and could likely result in the individual sliding down into the street.
There’s a pretty apt visual depiction of this on the acceptance criteria page.
This is a very open and shut case; this isn’t eligible.
Wrong. The object is the roundabout, not the middle of the roundabout. This is wrong use of safety.
Hello @Paramaribo79
I understand how frustrating it is when you have a place you feel is really good but it is just not allowed. I have had to sigh and walk away from similar places.
It is not just experienced wayfinders that have explained why this is not acceptable, but Niantic staff.
It has been clearly ruled not eligible.
The best possible thing to do now is to let it go.
The conversation is not going to be productive so we will consider closing.
Nothing about that roundabout is eligible.
It should be though.
No, the best possible thing is to write my opinion and try to have them change to a sensible rule
I am sorry but i dont think its gonna change.
Happy cake day!
Unfortunately there are occasions which an object doesn’t have safe access. There is a spot near me that has an information plaque along the side of the road. Sadly there is no sidewalk next to it, making it unsafe to stand next to.
Additionally, I wouldn’t call this sign meant to advertise businesses a sculpture. Calling it that could be seen as intentionally misleading.
I agree with @baskitoo and @Paramaribo79 and others that this Wayspot and others like it should, in my own subject view, be eligible. Many public landmarks are intentionally designed to be viewed and appreciated from a short distance away rather than touched directly. In those cases, it feels natural that a corresponding Wayspot would also be interacted with from that intended viewing distance. In practice, this is already how players engage with such locations. Pokémon GO’s 80‑meter interaction radius allows players to interact with a Wayspot without needing to stand directly beside it. Because of that, the strict “0‑meter” accessibility standard used in Wayfarer reviews feels out of step with how the game itself is actually played. If literal physical proximity were essential to gameplay, the interaction radius would presumably be far smaller than 80 meters.
That said, the current interpretation of “safe accessibility” used by the Wayfarer team (and widely accepted by the community) is very strict: reviewers expect that a person could physically approach and touch the point of interest. No doubt, this strict standard exists to prioritize user safety and reduce liability concerns. For that reason, I don’t expect the rule to change, even if it leads to unfortunate outcomes like this one.
I too, like @baskitoo and others who have contributed to this discussion, am motivated to submit Wayspot edits to improve accuracy and overall quality. However, situations like this one are a good reminder of why I approach location edits with caution. Even well-intentioned edits can lead to unexpected outcomes when the underlying eligibility standards are interpreted so strictly.
To be clear the reviewers following the Wayfarer rules about safe accessibility are the ones acting correctly.
Wayspot can be used in many game, not just pogo. In the past, when ingress is part of niantic, we need 0 meter distance to use ultrastrike effectively. I am not sure about other niantic game but even if there is none now, there could be other game in future. Anyway wayfarer are rejecting roundabout correctly as per rule. Perhaps you can suggest this on future AMA
When is the future AMA? Plus, how AMA works?
we do not have a date for the next AMA. This will be announced by the wayfarer team. an AMA, is basically a Q&A
If the pin is on the footpath, this 0 metre requirement is safely met.