Wayspot Title: Spazhouse Athenaeum – Little Free Library
Location (lat/lon): 30.311177, -81.685384
City: Jacksonville, Florida
Country: USA
Screenshot of the Rejection Email: Attached
Additional Information:
I am appealing the rejected removal report for this Wayspot because the Little Free Library is located on single-family private residential property.
Google Street View clearly shows the library positioned within the front yard of the residence, behind the property boundary rather than in a public right-of-way or other public space. The Wayspot coordinates also correspond with this residential parcel.
Street View:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/aTLmB9BjZfLt55DZ7
Under Wayfarer criteria, Wayspots located on single-family private residential property are ineligible regardless of whether the object may be reachable or visible from the sidewalk. I am requesting that the removal decision be reconsidered based on the clear Street View evidence showing its location on the residential property.
The wayspot pin is slightly misplaced and is between the sidewalk and the road; the LFL is in the garden and should have been removed when reported.
It doesn’t take more than a few seconds to see this using streetview.
I just tried a report myself and it failed. Believe this suggests that it has been removed and we are just awaiting for the ma to catch up?
If you check on the Submit tab, it isn’t there:
One of two explanations as far as I can see:
-
Scopely Explore saw this thread and decided it should have been removed
-
Someone else already reported it, and @ChicagoRay312 fell foul of the misinformation caused by Scopely Explore being unable to distinguish between “this wayspot did exist when the report was submitted, but we have already removed it” and “this wayspot did exist when the report was submitted, but we are not going to remove it”.
Yeah, that’s starting to get annoying. It’s making me not want to take the time to post appeals. I’ve noticed that happening several times now. I had one recently where I provided the article to the place moving locations and I received a rejection email. But when I went into check the reporting log, it showed the status as “moved,” even though the way spot was still in the same place. Hopefully they figure it all out soon.
In my mind, it’s easy to distinguish between these two situations. They know the wayspot existed when the report was submitted, since it would be impossible to submit the report otherwise. They know at the time of evaluating the report whether the wayspot still exists at the reported location, so from a systems perspective it would be extremely easy to change the wording.
It’s frustrating that they don’t see this as important enough to change it, given the apparent cost-benefit analysis - simplicity to do it and the benefit it would bring of stopping people from thinking Scopely Explore don’t actually care about their data.
This problem has existed for years though, right?
Perhaps the volume of reports is getting just high enough to that it shows up more often.
Do we feel it’s due to opening up reporting remotely? I like the feature, just curious if that’s the reasoning for the spike.
I’ve submitted a lot more removal reports since having the option through the map.
Prior to this feature: 2
Since this feature: 50+
Only 244 so far this year.
I slacked for a while.
Thanks for the appeal, @ChicagoRay312! We gave this a second look and decided to retire the Wayspot in question.
I recently reported a wayspot that was misplaced (by about 8-10 cells from the pictured building’s actual location). I looked at the area on the map yesterday and it had been moved. 30 minutes ago I got an email saying my report was rejected….
My numbers are much lower but that’s because I only report within the area I operate in, in real life. I think I’ve done about thirty location reports total, and half of them were wayspots on campus at one high school. Four more are locations within a kilometer of my office.
I have had this happen, it seems to be when someone else makes the same report and is dealt with first. Yours is then Rejected because it is already in the correct location…
Would be great if Scopely Explore could do something about this as it does make you think “how was this rejected” before realising…
Yeah. In this particular case, I already knew it had been moved, because I happen to have looked, so the email was a source of confusion. It would be better if it said something like “your report was out of date” and/or “this waypoint has been modified since your report”.
