Wayspot: Ibarra Grotto
Location: Manila (14.617522,120.997116)
I don’t know what’s wrong with my submission but I received an email that it got reported and violated one or more policies. It’s on the public side walk. I’m also curious as to where the “text or photo contains abuse, ridicule, or harassment” came from. Also, does this mean my account now has a strike?
Welcome to the forum 
The “Abuse” rejection narrative can be flagged for a nomination for any of the following reasons (roughly in order of how often they occur):
* The photo is not yours (e.g., taken from streetview, found on another website)
* The wayspot location pin is misplaced
* The wayspot is deliberately misrepresented (e..g., on school property but pretending it isn’t)
* The nomination is believed to be fake
* Another nomination was flagged and all of yours have been flagged as a consequence
* The text itself is abusive
* The nomination is controversial and likely to be offensive (e.g., a mural of terrorists)
* (there may be others)
You may be able to tell which of these is the issue for this submission, but don’t worry about being accused of being discriminatory, as this isn’t what this narrative is necessarily saying. This narrative is extremely unhelpful and badly worded, as 99% of the time, there are no insults, ridicule or harassment.
As for the POI, is this building a single-family private residence?
Thanks for replying and for the welcome. The POI is of an outdoor religious shrine placed on the public sidewalk.
As for the listed possible reasons for “Abuse”.
-The photo is taken by me.
-The pin is accurate when I checked it on streetview.
-It’s not on school property, as seen in the photos, it’s on the sidewalk.
-The POI really exists given photo evidence and streetview evidence.
-This is the first time I received this kind of email/violation warning.
-I don’t think there’s anything close to being offensive on the text or photo.
That isn’t what I asked. Is this building a single-family private residence?
Can you provide the coordinates? Scratch that - I just found it (there are multiple roads called Ibarra St).
It looks like this is the side of a shop, not a single-family residence, so the location is not a problem. I wouldn’t feel honest describing this as being on the sidewalk, since there is no sidewalk further down Ibarra St, but that isn’t really a problem.
The only issue I can see is the lack of safe pedestrian access, as you clearly aren’t supposed to use the side walk so would have to stand in the road, which is an instant rejection for a wayspot. This shouldn’t be enough to cause the generic very low level severity offense, so I can’t explain that.
Oh my mistake. I thought POI meant the shrine i nominated, not the building behind it.
Sadly, that’s usually how sidewalks are in areas like this. Some homeowners do and some don’t but, if it’s not on a major road, people just extend their houses over the public sidewalk which makes walking on the street the norm when passing by these areas. There is still a sliver of sidewalk there though and the shrine is built on it.
Do you think this POI can still get accepted if I worded it better?
I’ll explain better
The POI is the shrine, there is no issue with that. However, had that been a single-family private residential property (SFPRP) that the shrine is placed in-front of, it would be easy to see the location as not being eligible. If you look to the right on streetview, that looks like SFPRP, but this is the side of a shop, so it’s OK.
POI on the external boundaries of SFPRP are strictly not eligible, even if you can touch them from the sidewalk and even if they have been put there for the public to use. This rule has no wiggle room.
The side of the road here is technically a sidewalk, but in practice isn’t, so the issue of safe pedestrian access is dubious, which is a problem for you. I can see what the rules are supposed to be and what actually happens.
Someone else, or even Scopely Explore, might be able to comment on what the offense actually was, which would be helpful to know before resubmitting.
See if you can say more about the grotto. You have two sentences in your description, but the second one about public access belongs in the supporting information.
Thanks for the help.
A lot of the shrine wayspots in my area are like that so it got me conditioned into thinking “shrine on the street” = “wayspot”. Thanks for explaining. I’ll try again next time once I find out what the violation thing is.
I appealed through the “Contact Us” link in the email to see if I could get a reply there.
Thanks again
