Very weird appeal rejection that I would like overturned

[GeneralSecura]

• Wayspot Title: Wandelroutemarker Anderlechtstraat
• Location (lat/lon): 51.477230, 5.484679
• City: Eindhoven
• Country: Netherlands
• Additional Information (if any):

This trail marker I appealed was rejected because “it is a regular route marker that is not eligible for a Wayspot”. I find this to be very weird, as I have had dozens of these markers approved on appeal before, so I am very confused why this one was rejected and I would like to see this verdict overturned.

[GeneralSecura]

What’s even more puzzling is that the second appeal for one of these markers that I sent in at the same time as this rejected one WAS approved about 20 minutes later.

[wooperIooper]

There was a similar recently

Appeal for trail marker declined

Hello, I appealed this trail marker and it was rejected even on appeal for being a “common pilgrimage route sign with no significance”. I don’t quite understand, as that decision clashes with the criteria clarification l. The trail marker is at a decision point at a crossroads. Why was the appeal rejected? Martinusweg-Marker Stäudach Tübingen BW (48.532529,9.089172) Diese Pilgerwegmarkierung kennzeichnet den Martinusweg, einen Pilgerweg auf den Spuren des heiligen Martin. Der Tübinger Abschni…

[GeneralSecura]

I fear this topic might have been overlooked.

Could I get some eyes on this?

[GeneralSecura]

Tagging @ScopelyExpAaron @ScopelyExpAtlas @ScopelyExpLC . Seems this topic has been overlooked.

[GeneralSecura]

And now another appeal has been rejected, this time for being “just a directional sticker”.

@ScopelyExpAaron I would really appreciate some eyes on this.