Please don’t teach me to sock (sp) eggs. You have no idea what type of areas I play in and where I have submitted wayspots. The criteria are the same everywhere - city centre, urban, semi-urban, amusement parks, military areas, villages, towns, countryside.
The underpass is infrastructure. Being infrastructure does not make it eligible, but infrastructure can be eligible. Meeting Social/Exercise/Exploration criteria makes something eligible.
I don’t think that I agree with you. The fact that this nomination was approved by Scopely, doesn’t automatically mean this means Scopely agrees, but just that this appeal reviewer agrees. We often see that even appeals are overturned.
In this case, I don’t think the appeal was very wrong, it does surprise me (I would not have approved it), but I can understand why someone would approve it.
Nope, appeal approvals do not constitute personal clarifications on criteria. They can get corrected or removed just the same as any other wayspot. The only sources that can be relied on are the criteria themselves, and the Criteria Clarification Collection .
I am a moderator on this forum and would like to see concrete examples of threads where you were treated disrespectfully. You are always empowered to flag something if you don’t feel comfortable.
Underpasses, much like footbridges can encourage exercise, for example if you can show that it means that the walking route between two notable places is now safe and faster than driving, but it’s very much a case-by-case basis, and you need to sell that point every time.
Unlike some footbridges, underpasses are extremely unlikely to be interesting in themselves, or pass over a pretty river that is worth seeing, and so they will almost never meet the exploration criteria.
I would expect a middling footbridge between two vaguely interesting points to be accepted about 50% of the time. For an underpass? Maybe 10% at most?
In any case, the counterpoint of “there simply aren’t enough staff to deal with that volume of appeals” is pretty much watertight.
This is not accurate. An appeal decision does not set precedent. It only speaks to that appeals reviewer’s opinion on that nomination.
We often see an incorrect appeal rejection posted on the forum and overturned. We see people posting about appeals being accepted incorrectly much less often.
Thank you for informing me that I can be empowered to flag something if I don’t feel comfortable. I know what the flagging process is about as I have used it on one of my first nominations when trying to learn about criterias and people were just being smart about it which was resolved by niantics crew
I am not talking about nominations, I am talking about forum posts?
"I mentioned my dyslexia earlier, which is why my wording came across poorly and why it took me twenty attempts to get this right. Despite that, the fact that this appeal was approved by Niantic themselves proves it absolutely meets the criteria, even if you don’t think so yourselves.
If this underpass is dismissed as mere infrastructure, then by that same logic, bridges are also public infrastructure—yet pedestrian bridges are accepted when they link walking trails. This location at -32.554911, 151.157410 functions exactly the same way. It is a vital safety access point and the only safe pedestrian link connecting Darlington to Singleton Heights without having to walk across a busy highway. It directly connects parks and dozens of walking trails on both sides, which perfectly supports community exercise, socializing, and exploration.
A safe walkway does not have to look pretty; it has to be safe. That is the main objective of the location. Safety does not mean pretty or fancy—it is meant to provide secure passage for people within the community.
If you truly believe this shouldn’t be a wayspot, I have given you the exact location—go ahead and report it through the official channels.
Mod edit: Removed the unnecessary part.
Please stop attacking people - no-one is attacking you. Be respectful.
This is why you get pushback here. We have seen over and over again that an appeal decision does NOT set criteria. I will try to find a link to a statement from staff about this and edit it in.
Here is one such statement:
As you have been told, this is not what meets criteria. Strongly encouraging Exploration, Exercise and/or Socialisation is what means something meets criteria.
This is the kind of comment I would normally flag, but wanted to leave this here in case anyone is reading through the accusations of us being mean to you.
Mod edit: Removed the deleted part from the quoted text
Thank you, everyone, for your contribution to this discussion. The discussion now seems to have veered off track into unpleasant territory. As a result, I’ll be closing it to further engagement.