I want to open a discussion about a major flaw in the current Wayfarer system that punishes knowledgeable creators and actively floods the submission backlog.
It is completely logical that if Niantic reviews an appeal, overturns a community rejection, and pushes a Wayspot live into the game, the appeal credit should be returned to the player immediately.
Currently, contributors who strictly study and understand the criteria are limited to just two appeals on a hard 15-day cooldown, regardless of the outcome. In contrast, players who don’t understand the guidelines are given dozens of daily nomination slots, allowing them to flood the queue with low-quality submissions.
Worse, this 15-day lockout means valid safety features get wrongfully denied by inexperienced reviewers, and we have zero immediate recourse. Look at these exact examples from my own queue:
McDougall’s Reserve Underpass: A dedicated pedestrian/cyclist tunnel connecting a shared pathway network. The community wrongfully rejected it. I had to waste an appeal on it, and the second a Niantic employee looked at it, it was marked APPEAL ACCEPTED and went live in 24 hours. (Insert Screenshot of your approved McDougall’s Reserve appeal here)
New England Highway Underpass (Darlington to Singleton Heights): A permanent concrete walkway linking James White Park to the local bike track, specifically built to keep pedestrians safe from constant high-flowing industrial mine traffic. The community rejected it, claiming it wasn’t a “permanent fixture” or was a “general business.” (Insert Screenshot of your rejected Highway Underpass nomination here)
Because my appeal credit was tied up proving the community wrong on the first submission, I am now completely locked out of appealing the second public safety crossing until the 15-day timer clears. By the time my credit resets, the nomination will be pushed clean out of its appeal window, forcing me to waste time completely resubmitting it and further clogging the review backlog.
If reviewers who don’t know the criteria are going to wrongfully deny permanent public safety infrastructure, players who successfully prove them wrong on appeal should get their credit back right away. Returning credits for successful appeals would stop people from flooding the backlog with duplicate safety submissions, reward accurate mapping, and make the community a lot happier.
What are your thoughts on this? Should Niantic reward successful appeals by instantly refreshing the credit slot?
Sorry both nominations appeals were approved but as of now I do not have any reviews for the other safety access point that is in voting at the moment that will most likely be denied which will push it out of appeal window.
Since underpasses are definitely borderline submissions at best, complaining that you have run out of appeals when you are using them on borderline submissions is not a strong argument.
Better practice, given the hundreds of submission slots you have, is to resubmit when a borderline submission is rejected, using that opportunity to improve the text/photos.
(Or maybe accepting that a rejection is correct and not trying to appeal every rejection).
I want to clarify that I appealed this nomination because the underpass serves as a vital connection between Darlington and Singleton Heights. It provides safe pedestrian access between parks on both sides, which feature dozens of walking trails that encourage exercise, socializing, and outdoor recreation for the community.
I will accept a nomination to be denied if it doesn’t meet criteria but the criteria is being met there thank you I understand that it is a borderline submission but still this location is connecting two suburbs together with safe and pedestrian access on both sides some of us are located in a big city where there’s a thousand safe access points some of us are rural players before arguing about this read up on remote rural area nominations first you might learn a thing or two about rural submissions
I want to address the misconception that submissions in rural, low-density areas are automatically low-quality or borderline. In the countryside, context is everything. An underpass in a remote area functions identically to a trail footbridge, providing the only safe pedestrian link across a major thoroughfare. This is not a duplicate path; it is vital infrastructure that enables safe exploration and exercise. We cannot hold rural nominations to urban aesthetic standards when they fulfill the core purpose of the platform.
Appeals are manually reviewed by paid Niantic staff. There is a reason for the caps on the rates of appeals.
The community queue is reviewed by volunteers working for free. This is different to paid staff reviewing.
Only the highest reviewer tier gives +10 nomination slots per day. Being at the top user tier would indicate they are less likely to be players who “don’t understand the guidelines”
Your requested change (you being able to appeal more things) would not change the alleged issue of inexperienced players making low quality submissions, unless you are counting yourself as one of those users.
I am very confused what you mean by this. There is no appeal window in which you must appeal or else resubmit.
“Permanent public safety infrastructure” is not one of the eligibility criteria. The criteria is a great place to explore, a great place to socialise, and a great place to exercise. If reviewers are looking at your permanent public safety infrastructure and don’t think it meets any of those three criteria, their rejections are correct, not incorrect.
Writing your own post instead of copying and pasting from AI may make users more receptive to your arguments, and decrease time where we are trying to work out if your understanding of ‘appeal windows’ is incorrect, or it is just hallucinated AI output.
That does not mean it is eligible as a wayspot. Something being public infrastructure does not make it meet Exploration, Social or Exercise criteria, which every wayspot must meet.
I am amazed that the appeal for one of these underpasses was successful.
A specific sidewalk can provide an essential connection between places which otherwise would be hard to walk between. Doesn’t make it eligible.
Bridges tend to pass because they are inherently more interesting than underpasses, which are inherently unsafe and unappealing. Admittedly, this means people submit everything they see which looks remotely like a bridge, which is unfortunate.
When you use “AI” to write text for you, spend the time proof-reading it and make sure it says what you want. When it inserts meaningless phrases, correct them. For example, “pushed clean out of its appeal window”.
Isn’t there a time frame for denied nominations to be appealed but it will not let you. I thought I read something about a time period if that is not correct that’s my fault I am sorry I don’t use my appeals very often so I’m not 100% sure how they work
To answer your title question, appeals reviewers have to be able to address the appeals they receive. The reviewers must be able to handle the volume of appeals they must review.
Two every 15 days is way more than when the program started, which was one every 30 days. Right at the beginning, people were able to make an appeal every day - which was a bug - which tied up the review process for months, and it had to be shut down for a while to address the backlog.
Because we have fewer nominations than appeals, I usually recommend resubmitting before trying an appeal, but only after considering whether the submission can be improved. The nominations you have described do not seem particularly like great places to exercise, explore, or be social - those are the eligibility requirements. Wayspot Criteria — Wayfarer Help Center
I was told I shouldn’t resubmit denied nominations as it could put my account at risk of being banned that is what I have appealed it and not re-semited it you can say I had an ambassador message me yeah other people recenting a certain location in my area as that in my campfire community
I refuse to use nomination support or review support as last time I did I felt unwelcome this is why I have appealed this nomination as I have submitted it over five times with each time having more and more supporting information in the description for this location meets the criteria so I thought if it just denied by niantic than it don’t meet criteria and I will give up on the location
Maybe after five attempts the message “this is not eligible” should have come through. I know sometimes people keep trying and succeed on the 20th attempt, but for an obviously borderline submission, after five rejections, they can be taken as legitimate and not just reviewers having a bad day.
I do not see threads on this forum where wayfarers attack the op. They may tell the op things that are unwelcome, such as “this is not eligible”, but that has to happen when something is ineligible.
Even though you initially dismissed the underpass as mere infrastructure, the fact that it was approved by Niantic proves it met the necessary criteria, even if it wasn’t immediately obvious. Like bridges, which are also infrastructure but accepted for connecting pedestrian paths, this underpass serves a vital safety role connecting Darlington and Singleton Heights and links parks with dozens of walking trails. To understand how these differ from city submissions, I suggest reviewing Niantic’s specific guidelines for rural areas."
