Some questions about the proces of removing & adding wayspots

[Johnieyor]

Hi everyone,

I have a question about the whole process of removing Wayspots and Scopely’s involvement.

For example, in my local area there were several PokéStops featuring local cycling route signs. I would estimate around three, and I added another three over the course of a few weeks. A few weeks ago, both the newly added and the existing Wayspots featuring these signs were removed. Some were there for years.

I was under the impression that these signs meet the criteria. They mark a local route (with a name/number), are maintained by a well-known organisation (with its logo), and are therefore permanent. They also serve as decision points, providing directions for the route.

Can I conclude from this that Scopely considers these signs unsuitable as Wayspots, given that several of them have now been removed? And why does Scopely intervene afterwards rather than during the review process?

In my opinion, there are two points at which Scopely could intervene if they believe a Wayspot does not meet their requirements:

• At the time of submission (AI review): Many other signs are already detected, even very local signs are automatic rejected by AI. So, if Scopely considers these signs ineligible, they could easily add them to the AI review process.
• After the community has voted: Scopely could also decide not to approve the Wayspot after the community has completed its review.

So I don’t understand exactly why they are accepted and later removed, when there is room in the process to intervene earlier? And can I conclude that the signs are not eligble?

Thanks for helping me, in my new Wayfarer journey!

[pokemaster4u2]

Certainly strange, as other wayspots won’t be removed even though many people at this forum consider these as highly inappropriate.

See:

Aborted Baby Memorial Stone report rejected

Thanks for the appeal, @cyndiepooh , we stand by our decision to not remove this Wayspot. The purpose of our games is to create an augmented reality experience that is interwoven with the physical world. For this reason, our platform reflects game objects that currently exist in reality. Scopely Explore does not take a stance on locations, but rather leaves these decisions up to local communities. Any changes to locations in the physical world will be reflected in our games. We encourage you to…

or

Funeral Home report rejected

Removal reports are reviewed as per the removal criteria. This Wayspot doesn’t meet our removal criteria.

[cyndiepooh]

I just had a rejection for reporting a dentist’s office. That doesn’t meet criteria in any way, but it had been accepted and they are happy to keep it. These Route signs actually do encourage exercise and exploration, yet they get removed. Make it make sense.

They have tried to explain which they consider to be ineligible, but I don’t get it. It is apparently the ones that point to the next juncture? Something about nodes?

Wayspot restoration request: Dutch trail markers

Thanks for the appeal, @Jeroenix. These signboards are directional signs to the next node which are similar to general directional signs as has been established through different discussion on this forum. These are not part of a defined trail. As a result, we are unable to restore these.

[pokemaster4u2]

Indeed. These “nodes” are the decision points within the (inter-)national recreational bike network. The directional signs are intended to stay on the right track to reach the next decision point.

(actually there is also a national walking network, a national horsebackride network and even a national skeeler network, they all use a similar sign, just different colors)