military training base ... games banned from playing

When visiting my someone in Brandon MB Canada. All games are banned that require you to interact with the real world. So you I report them to get them remove or submit more? So that brings in question in place ban the use of cell phone or the game in area. Like gas station no use of cell phones.

Comments

  • The problem with that is that not all military bases have the same regulations. You can't just blanket get rid of all portals on all bases. Some bases even have public Access and have considered holding a FS there in the on base park. What you are suggesting is like using a broadsword for brain surgery.

  • JudyBJudyB ✭✭✭
    edited July 25

    This issue is not unique to military bases - there are, or have been, portals on other sites where the use of mobile phones is forbidden. For example there was at least one portal on the site of a radio telescope where mobile phones were prohibited.

    It's up to users when submitting portals to be certain that they aren't breaking the law or local rules when taking photos or submitting portals. It's also up to players to make certain that they aren't breaking rules when capturing portals.

    If people do ignore restrictions then I think that Niantic's assumption is that the site owners will report any problems to them and request removal

  • GrogyanGrogyan ✭✭✭

    Military Bases should be considered Private Property, as they are the property of the respected Defence force.

    Regardless if they are open to the public at certain times of the year.


    It can be regarded as a significant security issue for the site



    Apartment parks, are valid, as per the criteria

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭

    I actually support removing portals at military installations as agents refuse to follow the rules on not approving new portals on bases. Mark them like schools and be done with it tired of agents feeling entitled having military bases as guarded portals. If agents can't follow the rules in OPR on approving new portals they should just OSM tag them like schools and call it a day tired of people coming on here repeatedly complaining about portals being approved on bases that have said no to playing.

  • Base portals always comes up for discussion. There are bases where the defence member and families live and can sign in civilians to enter the base and stay on base. Other bases have open days and ceremonial parades where hundreds of ‘civilian’s visit almost every week so saying it should be banned is incorrect. What about mine sites that don’t allow visitors and are restrictive as well??

  • TheFarixTheFarix ✭✭✭✭

    It's nearly impossible for Niantic to keep track of which areas prohibit cell phone use and it would only encourage agents to make bad faith removal requests citing such bans in order to remove "strategic" portals. Therefore, it is not a factor when determining if a portal is valid or not.

  • Exactly. I’ve been on the receiving end of when opposite faction wanted my base portals removed and they lost. They made such a big deal out of it and to this day still have not gotten over it lol.

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭

    And they removed portals at schools. They can keep track and it is called geo fencing based on open street maps. Remove portals with military base shading and put a restriction on them. Yes it would inconvience people who live on base but would take liability off naintic if something stupid were to happen.

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭
    edited August 14


    Well I am sorry but I don't agree with agents hiding behind certain secure portal locations acting like victims if they get removed. I am sorry but where does it state people have a right to play a game on any property and to actually passively promote illegal activities on military bases under the current passive rule set that they have is negligence. The entire removal process is flawed first off I don't think cherry picking removals is right or fair to OPR reviewers especially if people are just going to keep submitting in areas they should not be. I have gotten portal submissions in areas on bases that should not been even photographed and sent to OPR. We have already seen a resurgence portals in traffic circles and places that were removed due to complaints. I do not agree with people trying say military bases are just "fine" there were complaints as far back as 2014 about ingress use on military bases but Niantic has ignored it due to alienating a very small portion of the player base. Also I don't think people realize that actively allowing agents to submit portals on military bases that have criminal penalties for using phones for playing games is putting liability on the line. Basically aiding in committing a crime in certain jurisdictions.

  • kholman1kholman1 ✭✭✭
    edited August 14


    First off yes Niantic could technically be responsible. If person aids in committing a crime it is considered aiding and abetting. Does a company have zero responsibility for a product they sell to companies to develop other games using player sourced data that is in some places illegal? I don't understand why agents act like they are above the law but if an agent reports military base portals and they can show proof that there is laws on the books that particular jurisdiction prohibits the use of mobile gaming devices they should remove them. Why is it that agents showing proof they are not allowed to play ingress on base ignored? IF we are going to allow bases allow valid proof of take down. Certain areas should be allowed such as museums etc but I think the biggest issue is the fact valid complaints of areas that forbid playing mobile games have been rejected. With Niantic not even giving honest guidelines on if we should approve new portals on bases is being brought back up again after this last round people asking for base take downs not to mention the daily submissions of random portals agents have been getting in OPR. Sorry if I feel strongly about this and it isn't jealousy over secured anchors. I don't support portals that could cause interference with security at a military base. It is one thing to have a portal behind a fence at a private business where cell phones are allowed but having portals in areas where service members should be working and not goofing off on their phone is another thing.

  • Niantic has stated multiple times in the past. Old portals already on bases are still valid, new submissions should be rejected. That's the end of it. Stop trying to invent new criteria, please.

  • KliffingtonKliffington ✭✭
    edited August 15

    Just going to post my favorite Krug response:

    158: A place where members of the community can gather outside of their homes. A congregation point with something Portal worthy at the location. I don't understand the over analyzing of this topic besides people being unhappy that an apartment complex has a playground in the middle with a portal they can't access are upset about it. People need to stop over analyzing things and making mountains out of molehills. There is really too much in life to legitimately get worked up about beyond whether or not you can access a playground portal or not. I wish people would devote 1/10th the energy to a charitable act that they do arguing about playgrounds and military bases in Ingress.

Sign In or Register to comment.