I am appealing the in-game rejection regarding the deliberate location manipulation and severe voting abuse between these two Wayspots.
Physical Collocation & Coordinate Abuse: As clearly shown in the attached photo, both the pavilion (월송동 정자) and the monument (월송동 공적비) physically stand side-by-side (merely 1–2 meters apart) within the exact same former village hall courtyard (50, Onggol-gil). The original submitter deliberately manipulated the pin coordinates across S2 L17 cell boundaries to bypass density rules.
Abnormal Vote Manipulation: This is a quiet, remote rural area with only a few houses, where surrounding legitimate Wayspots average only 1–2 likes. In contrast, one of these manipulated spots abnormally holds over 50 photo upvotes, indicating coordinated multi-account botting or spoofing.
** Definitive Photographic Evidence & Strict Removal Request: I have attached a clear, wide-angle photograph showing both the pavilion and the monument side-by-side in a single frame, proving they occupy the exact same physical space. Because both Wayspots are illegitimate products of intentional location falsification and vote abuse, I do NOT want them relocated. I strictly request the immediate and permanent removal of BOTH Wayspots from the Niantic database..
The in-game support dismissed this report with a generic automated reply. I respectfully request the Wayfarer team to review the attached evidence and completely delete both abused Wayspots.
It is not obvious what the problem is that you are trying to correct. You have said two objects are next to each other in real life and they are also next to each other in Pokemon Go. Is it possible they have moved from when you first saw them?
I am formally requesting the complete and permanent removal of these Wayspots due to deliberate system manipulation from their inception. Here is the full history and current status of this location:
Original Coordinate Manipulation (Two Illegitimate Gyms):
These two objects physically sit right next to each other (1–2 meters apart) in the exact same courtyard of a former village hall (50, Onggol-gil). The original submitter intentionally falsified the pin coordinates to separate them across cell boundaries. Through this manipulation and a multi-account voting ring (forcing 50+ upvotes on the photo), two illegitimate Gyms were artificially created side-by-side in this tiny rural area.
Recent Demotion and Current Status (Only One PokéStop Remains):
Following an initial report regarding this abuse, the pins were corrected toward their actual physical locations. As a direct result of correcting the coordinates:
The illegitimate Gym status was removed and demoted to PokéStops.
Due to S2 L17 cell density rules, the two overlapping objects could no longer coexist in Pokémon GO. Consequently, the monument was dropped from the game map, and currently only a single PokéStop (the pavilion) remains visible.
Why Permanent Removal of Both Is Strictly Necessary:
Although only one PokéStop is currently visible in-game, that remaining Wayspot still unnaturally holds over 50 manipulated upvotes from the voting ring and exists solely as a byproduct of coordinate fraud. Leaving this remaining spot active still rewards the abuser for exploiting the system.
Therefore, I respectfully request that the Niantic team take decisive action by permanently deleting both abused Wayspots from the Niantic Lightship database, completely resolving this long-standing abuse.
제목: 정식 삭제 요청: 고의적 좌표 조작 및 추천 어뷰징 건 (월송동 정자 & 월송동 공적비)
생성 초기부터 고의적인 시스템 규정 악용으로 만들어진 해당 웨이스팟들의 완전하고 영구적인 정식 삭제를 요청합니다. 해당 위치의 전체 경과와 현재 상태는 다음과 같습니다:
최초 좌표 조작 내역 (부정 체육관 2개 공존):
두 대상물은 구 마을회관 마당(옹골길 50) 내에서 불과 1~2m 거리를 두고 바로 붙어 있는 시설물입니다. 등록자는 셀 경계를 우회하기 위해 고의로 핀 좌표를 서로 멀리 떨어뜨려 조작했습니다. 이러한 조작과 다계정 추천 봇(사진 추천 50개 이상 조작)을 통해 한적한 시골 구석에 2개의 부정 체육관이 나란히 생성되었습니다.
최근 강등 조치 및 현재 상태 (현재 1개의 포켓스탑만 잔존):
해당 어뷰징 신고 접수 후 핀 위치가 실제 현장 좌표로 교정되었습니다. 좌표가 정위치로 수정됨에 따라 다음과 같은 조치가 발생했습니다:
부당하게 유지되던 체육관들이 포켓스탑으로 강등되었습니다.
같은 S2 L17 셀 안에 겹치게 되면서 셀 밀도 규칙에 따라 공적비는 인게임 맵에서 탈락했고, 현재는 단 1개의 포켓스탑(정자)만 인게임에 노출되어 있는 상태입니다.
두 스팟 모두 영구 삭제되어야 하는 이유:
비록 인게임에는 1개의 포켓스탑만 남아 있는 상태지만, 여전히 해당 스탑에는 다계정 봇으로 조작된 50개 이상의 비정상적인 추천수가 남아 있으며 애초에 좌표 조작이라는 부정행위의 결과물로 탄생한 스팟입니다. 이 잔여 스팟을 그대로 남겨두는 것은 규정 위반 행위자에게 부당한 이득을 인정해 주는 꼴입니다.
따라서 나이언틱 담당팀에서 확실한 조치를 취하여, 악용된 두 웨이스팟 모두를 나이언틱 라이트십 데이터베이스에서 영구 삭제(Permanent Removal) 처리해 주실 것을 정식으로 요청합니다.
With the locations being corrected allowing the games to rebalance I don’t see much more that Scopely should need to address. These both seem to be valid and eligible real world points of interest.
At least one of the two was nominated by Ingress players as the photos are 12 and 9 years old. This may have increased the number of likes as well if another player base was involved. A nearby church cross also has a high number of likes and is from that time period as well.
The photo votes only determine the cover photo. Who is being rewarded here and how?
The Wayspots are for valid real-life objects, and now that their location has been corrected, they abide by normal game inclusion rules. If you are concerned about abuse and displacement, why remove them? This would allow a potential abuser to resubmit them in false cells again.
Thank you for the clarification and feedback, @Tntnnbltn.
(Please note that I am using an automated translator to read and write here, so I kindly ask for your understanding if certain phrasing or nuances come across as slightly unnatural or distorted.)
Regarding your question of “Who is being rewarded and how?”:
I was not making an arbitrary assumption, but rather citing widely documented community research and player guides on Pokémon GO mechanics. According to established community studies, gym priority within an S2 Level 14 cell is determined by the highest combined score of photos and photo upvotes. Under that recognized rule, a spot with over 50 upvotes essentially locks in guaranteed priority to become a Gym if another threshold is reached in this area. That is why local players see it as an unearned advantage.
As for the votes themselves, @LetsRollGirl pointed out that these nominations date back 9–12 years to early Ingress, which provides a very reasonable explanation for how those likes accumulated over time. Given the history of deliberate displacement and the fact that another 50-like spot sits right in the adjacent cell, it was hard not to suspect coordinated gym targeting. However, the explanation of legacy Ingress activity is certainly plausible and convincing.
I also completely agree with your point on anchoring vs. resubmission: keeping the Wayspot anchored strictly at its true, real-world coordinates is indeed the most effective safeguard against anyone attempting to resubmit it in a false location.
Given that deletion is off the table, is it possible instead to take an action such as resetting or clearing the upvote count so that the unearned gym priority is neutralized? Aside from inquiring about the feasibility of such a vote reset, I will not make any further demands or pursue additional requests regarding this Wayspot.
The primary issue—deliberate location manipulation and the duplicate gym—has been successfully resolved. Thank you both for your time, insight, and help
That information is out of date. It is very likely that there is a random choice made.
These wayspots are not gyms. The pokestop has a roughly 1 in 18 chance to become a gym if 3 more wayspots found, just like every other pokestop in the cell.
Thank you for letting me know, @salixsorbus!
I assumed that rule was still active because right after the two previous gyms were demoted, the next two Wayspots with the highest upvotes immediately turned into the new gyms.
Thank you
The evidence is unclear. Some people have seen the highest-voted wayspot become a gym; some have seen other wayspots becoming gyms. Scopely Explore have said it is abusive to vote rig and have implied that it is now random.
With the 1st and 2nd gyms, with only a few pokestops available, it is easy for the random choice to be the wayspot with the most votes, so finding this happens would only be useful data if it happens every time, so has to be consistently observed.
With the 3rd gym, the wayspot with the most votes becoming the gym is more interesting.
Regardless of the gym promotion rules or systems which Pokemon Go choose to use, we’ve never seen something that is ineligible to be a Pokestop (due to being in an occupied cell) turn into a gym.
You sound awfully similar to taeeonmom and their recent topic also about pavillion locations in Korea. Are you the same person because I believe having multiple accounts goes against the terms of service.
The case by taeeonmom you are referring to is in Gimhae (Gyeongsangnam-do), which is over 200 km away from my report in Gongju (Chungcheongnam-do). I have no connection to that person or that region.
Maybe, He ues gemini
Thank you for the clarification, @Tntnnbltn.
I understand your point regarding the hidden Wayspot that became ineligible due to cell density rules.
However, what I was referring to is the remaining active PokéStop (the pavilion) at that exact same location. While the monument was hidden from the game, the pavilion is still active in Pokémon GO and retains those 50+ upvotes, which was why I was concerned about its potential gym priority.
That being said, I completely accept the current situation now. Since it has been explained that gym selection is largely random, I plan to submit about two more valid Wayspots in this area myself to reach the threshold and see a new, legitimate Gym created naturally.
Thank you all very much for your time and helpful explanations!
