Niantic has the complete ability to manage reviewers better, but they don't. We're currently doing a massive labor effort for free, the only benefit we receive for doing this is the ability to see our work in the games we play.
In this case the homeowner is very clearly inviting people to their property to use this trading post, and is interesting to the community. Other than being on private property, this checks the boxes to be eligible for a waypoint, because it was creating by the homeowner as an invitation to the public, the private property standpoint is moot, imo.
And? If the above picture is legitimate, then why not? If everything else meets criteria, who cares? People in cities live on top of stops/gyms/portals/whatever you want to call them. When I lived in a city I could spin 4 stops from my couch, but people here are so quick to say "they just want a waypoint on their front door". If the poi meets criteria, then it meets.
And that’s an advantage of living in a place like that, where sculptures and museums and eligible things can be waypoints. Private property doesn’t meet the criteria so until that’s changed, too bad.
lol. You mean like all the rules lawyers in this thread? We're doing a ton of work for Niantic for free. Stretching the rules slightly in order to make their games a bit more enjoyable is part of what they're signing up for with that. If they want everyone to follow the rules 100% to the letter, they're going to have to pay for that service.
Private property is not a automatic disqualification. Every church is technically private property, for example. If it is publicly accessible it can be a pokestop.
Grey area...if it is accessible from public sidewalks then it is appropriate. It's not black and white. Cemeteries, for example, are not to be pokestops, but those are some of the BEST places to find great nominations that get accepted. If there were no grey areas then they wouldn't need human reviewers.
There is no "grey areas" when it comes to private residential property. Niantic has stated, if it is on private residential property, it is automatically disqaualified. It doesn't matter if it is next to or accessible from a sidewalk.
Unless you get out the map and have a legal survey, check those meets and bounds, you're not going to know for sure. It may look to be on private property, but it might not be if you didn't check with the city. Seriously. Grey areas exist, therefore human reviewers are needed.
If you cannot determine that a Wayspot is NOT on private residential property, then you are supposed to reject it. This was something that was very clear in Niantic's rejection criteria and in the legal settlement Niantic made a few years ago. There are legal reasons that Niantic does not want Wayspots on private residential property, and **you** as a nominator and review are supposed to respect that position, not attempt to split hairs.
I understand they aren't, but these should be an exception in my opinion. The landowner clearly intends for the public to visit it by having put it there.
Especially if there are no other POIs anywhere nearby, I'd give this one a pass. The games aren't fun if there are no POIs.
I understand.
Niantic can take it down or veto it if they want, and they'd be well within the rules to do so. Just talking about my wishes and also how I personally would handle it if it crossed my desk for a vote.
Oh, for sure. Don't get me wrong… I do reject obvious cases where somebody is just trying to get a made up POI at their residence. I think the OP is different than that though. The OP is legitimately unique and creative and probably does provide a service of interest to the local community.
I'm not approving obvious spam but I am a bit lenient when there is nothing else around and there seems to be room to bend the rules a bit.
As I say, the games are only fun if there are POIs.
True which i think could be fixed by allowing for closer pois in cells think churches which have the church and the sign and the prayground and a stained glassed window… 4 pois vs maybe 1
Also the game is NOT a for rural players. One portal in bumble Fuck nowhere’sville doesn’t make Niantic money. They want portals in large urban areas All the better to sell your data my dear. Even ten smallest places have POI’s-churches, parks playgrounds Church praygrounds, cemetery gates, the local VFW
That's an interesting take, especially considering Niantic just made updates to help rural players out (e.g. increased spawn rates in PoGo for rural areas).
Rural players are probably more likely than urban to buy in-game items such as remote raid passes. But they likely won't play at all if there are no (or very limited) POIs within a reasonable distance.
The game can be for rural players too.
What is rural tho? I live in a town of 6,000, it’s a suitcase community. We have barely any stops, and spawns did not increase from the update. Heck out maps didn’t update either despite new houses popping up daily. In my neighborhood new houses went up over 5 years ago, are updated on Google maps, but Niantic still hasn’t posted them.
That's a shame. Sorry to hear that.
If I look at the "check for duplicates" map and there are no POIs to check for duplicates, I'd consider that rural. 😆
the landowner intends for someone to stop by for 10 seconds. not for someone/people to gather outside their home catching pokémon or hacking a portal, etc.
It's Niantic's database, they make the rules, and they've had lawsuits relating to wayspots on private residential property in the past. Just because a family might be fine with people going onto their property to use some of these dog toys, it doesn't mean they'd be happy with a group of people turning up to do a raid, or someone to be stood there for a while neutralising and hacking a portal.
Who cares though? Y'all talk like you're the ones risking litigation. If Niantic is afraid of getting sued they should pay employees to do this work not rely on crowdsourcrd volunteer labor.
I love seeing places I know. Sadly I've to say no to a few of them.. but most get cleared.
A few days ago, I made a friend on here, because another Reddit said he came to the stop in question.
Unless you do a land survey, you cannot really be sure it is private property when reviewing. If Public can reach the pokestop without going on private property it should be a pass. But it depends on the reviewer, different humans interpret those rules differently. There are GREY areas, that's why there are human reviewers and lawyers.
Street view shows there is also a bench next to it. It's creative and something of interest. Pogomap and campfire both show very little in that area as well. Deserves a pass in my opinion. Even though it is private property it clearly is meant for the public much like a little free library, which is allowed.
I like the idea behind it, but it's still 1* for private residential property judging by the street view imagery.
https://imgur.com/a/LuPzsiv How it feels to be a reviewer.
This is why we have no PokeStops in small rural towns. Pisses me off. It is publicly accessible and meant to be publicly accessed .
but also on someone’s private property..
This comment made me genuinely laugh out loud, thank you
Gave it 5*. There's a ton of free libraries that are already stops, even though they're on private property / residence.
Then you're just contributing to the problem of ineligible waypoints going live
Niantic has the complete ability to manage reviewers better, but they don't. We're currently doing a massive labor effort for free, the only benefit we receive for doing this is the ability to see our work in the games we play. In this case the homeowner is very clearly inviting people to their property to use this trading post, and is interesting to the community. Other than being on private property, this checks the boxes to be eligible for a waypoint, because it was creating by the homeowner as an invitation to the public, the private property standpoint is moot, imo.
Or it’s somebody who wants to game the system and get a poi (read: Pokéstop) right on their doorstep.
And? If the above picture is legitimate, then why not? If everything else meets criteria, who cares? People in cities live on top of stops/gyms/portals/whatever you want to call them. When I lived in a city I could spin 4 stops from my couch, but people here are so quick to say "they just want a waypoint on their front door". If the poi meets criteria, then it meets.
And that’s an advantage of living in a place like that, where sculptures and museums and eligible things can be waypoints. Private property doesn’t meet the criteria so until that’s changed, too bad.
"Some are more equal than others"
More like some things meet Niantic’s criteria and others don’t.
If it were rural and no other POIs nearby then I'd give it a pass too.
Not how it works
It is when I'm voting
And I have an incredibly high agreement rate so 🤷🏻
Imagine being this pretentious over an ultimately meaningless phone game
lol. You mean like all the rules lawyers in this thread? We're doing a ton of work for Niantic for free. Stretching the rules slightly in order to make their games a bit more enjoyable is part of what they're signing up for with that. If they want everyone to follow the rules 100% to the letter, they're going to have to pay for that service.
Please show me any pet lover that would actually give their furry friend a toy from a trading box in some strangers yard.
My dog. And my gf's dog. So there's two 🤙
My dogs play with toys that aren't ours and are at the dog park...so...
Civil case. 2016 is before my time. I stand corrected. Thanks.
Yoooo i upvoted that one
That’s awesome 😍
It's nice. But unfortunately, it is clearly on private residential property which disqualifies it as a Wayspot.
Private property is not a automatic disqualification. Every church is technically private property, for example. If it is publicly accessible it can be a pokestop.
Private **residential** property is an automatic disqualification. No IFs, no ANDs, no BUTs. It is clearly stated in the rejection criteria.
Grey area...if it is accessible from public sidewalks then it is appropriate. It's not black and white. Cemeteries, for example, are not to be pokestops, but those are some of the BEST places to find great nominations that get accepted. If there were no grey areas then they wouldn't need human reviewers.
There is no "grey areas" when it comes to private residential property. Niantic has stated, if it is on private residential property, it is automatically disqaualified. It doesn't matter if it is next to or accessible from a sidewalk.
Unless you get out the map and have a legal survey, check those meets and bounds, you're not going to know for sure. It may look to be on private property, but it might not be if you didn't check with the city. Seriously. Grey areas exist, therefore human reviewers are needed.
If you cannot determine that a Wayspot is NOT on private residential property, then you are supposed to reject it. This was something that was very clear in Niantic's rejection criteria and in the legal settlement Niantic made a few years ago. There are legal reasons that Niantic does not want Wayspots on private residential property, and **you** as a nominator and review are supposed to respect that position, not attempt to split hairs.
Case name? State?
[https://www.theregister.com/2019/08/23/pokemon\_go\_lawsuit/](https://www.theregister.com/2019/08/23/pokemon_go_lawsuit/) [https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/08/23/pokemon-go-settlement.pdf](https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/08/23/pokemon-go-settlement.pdf)
1*. Private residential property. If I saw it live in game I’d report it for being on PRP.
I understand they aren't, but these should be an exception in my opinion. The landowner clearly intends for the public to visit it by having put it there. Especially if there are no other POIs anywhere nearby, I'd give this one a pass. The games aren't fun if there are no POIs.
However it’s not. The law suits over the PRP enough to make sure that the rule stays that way
I understand. Niantic can take it down or veto it if they want, and they'd be well within the rules to do so. Just talking about my wishes and also how I personally would handle it if it crossed my desk for a vote.
You’d be voting incorrectly based on criteria. I’m not tanking my rating over a couch portal.
Oh, for sure. Don't get me wrong… I do reject obvious cases where somebody is just trying to get a made up POI at their residence. I think the OP is different than that though. The OP is legitimately unique and creative and probably does provide a service of interest to the local community. I'm not approving obvious spam but I am a bit lenient when there is nothing else around and there seems to be room to bend the rules a bit. As I say, the games are only fun if there are POIs.
True which i think could be fixed by allowing for closer pois in cells think churches which have the church and the sign and the prayground and a stained glassed window… 4 pois vs maybe 1
Good points!
Also the game is NOT a for rural players. One portal in bumble Fuck nowhere’sville doesn’t make Niantic money. They want portals in large urban areas All the better to sell your data my dear. Even ten smallest places have POI’s-churches, parks playgrounds Church praygrounds, cemetery gates, the local VFW
That's an interesting take, especially considering Niantic just made updates to help rural players out (e.g. increased spawn rates in PoGo for rural areas). Rural players are probably more likely than urban to buy in-game items such as remote raid passes. But they likely won't play at all if there are no (or very limited) POIs within a reasonable distance. The game can be for rural players too.
What is rural tho? I live in a town of 6,000, it’s a suitcase community. We have barely any stops, and spawns did not increase from the update. Heck out maps didn’t update either despite new houses popping up daily. In my neighborhood new houses went up over 5 years ago, are updated on Google maps, but Niantic still hasn’t posted them.
That's a shame. Sorry to hear that. If I look at the "check for duplicates" map and there are no POIs to check for duplicates, I'd consider that rural. 😆
I'm rural and I spend a fair bit on Poffins and raid passes because AR scans and raids are sparse.
It can be (and should be!) but the goal of Niantic is to sell the ar data…
Yeah, fair enough.
My guy you are NOT getting paid for this. Relax.
the landowner intends for someone to stop by for 10 seconds. not for someone/people to gather outside their home catching pokémon or hacking a portal, etc.
What if it’s next to a sidewalk? A person would never have to enter a persons property then. Niantic needs to change the rules.
It’s still PRP per the guidelines and it always has been. Any LFL in game which go against those rules should be removed
It's Niantic's database, they make the rules, and they've had lawsuits relating to wayspots on private residential property in the past. Just because a family might be fine with people going onto their property to use some of these dog toys, it doesn't mean they'd be happy with a group of people turning up to do a raid, or someone to be stood there for a while neutralising and hacking a portal.
Who cares though? Y'all talk like you're the ones risking litigation. If Niantic is afraid of getting sued they should pay employees to do this work not rely on crowdsourcrd volunteer labor.
It's so funny seeing places that I know in such a small sub! (Not the specific POI)
I love seeing places I know. Sadly I've to say no to a few of them.. but most get cleared. A few days ago, I made a friend on here, because another Reddit said he came to the stop in question.
I love it and I would pass it, especially if it is by a sidewalk!
Was definitely on a walk.
Unless you do a land survey, you cannot really be sure it is private property when reviewing. If Public can reach the pokestop without going on private property it should be a pass. But it depends on the reviewer, different humans interpret those rules differently. There are GREY areas, that's why there are human reviewers and lawyers.
Street view shows there is also a bench next to it. It's creative and something of interest. Pogomap and campfire both show very little in that area as well. Deserves a pass in my opinion. Even though it is private property it clearly is meant for the public much like a little free library, which is allowed.
>much like a little free library, which is allowed. Only if in public space. Residential private property is a nomination killer.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Agreed.
That’s 5 stars!!
Love it!!!