@TimerCIock Okay Let me break it down again for you.
"These are things in Parks. Parks specifically calls out Parks have "Common all around the world and encourage players to walk, exercise and enjoy public places."" - No where does it say to submit common things in parks. This is just saying that PARKS are all around the world. Not saying submit common everyday things in parks.
"Adventurous tourist attractions - "etc..." Water fountains promote hydration while exercising in a park and are a tourist attraction when used in the park..." Water Fountain and Drinking Fountain are 2 different things. Water Fountains are artistic displays often in public places, Drinking Fountains are these "Hydration Stations" you reference. 2 very different things.
"History..... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_fountains_in_the_United_States Some have been around for over 130 years.... Over 50 years for animals to use as well. That is historic items for the parks that most people don't even know the history for.... As it was involved in the Civil Rights Act of 1964...." - Honestly if you can find proof of a drinking fountain being 130 years old with history yea you might be able to get that to pass because THAT specific drinking Fountain is historically significant. Also same for the Civil Rights movement, a specific water fountain significant to the Civil Rights movement should be a portal. That being said because drinking fountains were involved during the Civil Rights movement or because drinking fountains were invented 130 years ago does not make them submittable. Again correlation is not causation.
Lets talk about Foot Access, this is in reference to WATER FOUNTAINS not DRINKING FOUNTAINS. (This is mostly in reference to water fountains in ponds/lakes being bad candidates because there is no access)
Edit: Bold is just to reference my replies to previous comments of yours.
1. I'm in maryland. Do you not know your history for the civil rights? All of the parks water fountains were involved in the civil rights segregation.
2. There is artistic historic fountains that should be poi's. Go to the link I provided. Current and updated technology fountains over the years have some artistic value to them. See my pictures.
3. Playgrounds, baseball fields, basketball courts, pavilions are common things at parks already approved. Nothing in guide says they cant be approved because they are in a park.
4. Drinking water fountains are intend to be used by the community in public places. Makes it a valid portal. Look at the definition of it. Google it yourself.
Once again, "safe to access" is a secondary criteria. To be approved, every candidate must be safe to access that does not mean everything that is safe to access is a candidate.
Submissions should first meet other approval criteria. And for fountains that means artistic display.
If I'm wrong please feel free to show me the Merritt Park Drinking Fountain you got approved
Here is an example of a decorative fountain that actually meets criteria
@TimerCIock Logic puzzle for you buddy.
If he was walking about drinking fountains why did he even mention in the middle of a roundabout? you ever seen a drinking fountain in the middle of a roundabout?
Doesnt matter. Per the response fountains need foot access. Drinking water fountains have it. Simple. It has history. It has everything needed to be a portal.
It does matter since you are using it to support your argument
@TimerCIock Take it you haven't read up on those logical fallacies as I suggested. You really should, might help you make a more compelling argument. Maybe sway a couple people to your side.
@TimerCIock I am paraphrasing an above statement below, can you confirm this is what you are saying?
Live in Maryland, Maryland was part of the Civil Rights Movement, therefore all "Drinking" Fountains were part of the Civil Rights Movement
I'm guessing you've never been to a beach? These stations are all along the beach as well as parks. They are unique architecture, statues that are used for community hydration. It meets the criteria.
"Public parks are great, high-quality places for portals; they are common all around the world and encourage players to walk, exercise and enjoy public places". Drinking water fountains are considered public places and a fixed structure.
"Fountain - accept if it has pedestrian access, i.e. agents can walk up to it. Reject spouts in the middle of the lake with no access." Can you spell fountain. Can you spell drinking water fountain. No where in the guide does it call out they have to be decorative.... just has to be a fountain. Well tough ****. Drinking fountains are fountains. That's like saying a pavilion isnt a gazebo.
They have historical value that is defined in the civil rights act of 1964. Saying it doesn't meet is like saying the bill of rights exhibit in Washington DC isnt valid. Because it's not pretty and old. Museums have water fountains. No history in museums for them?
Part of history is learning about it. Might want to ask people who were involved in that timeline and ask how important it was to them.... that is the point of poi. Remind people of the history and that we have learned from our mistakes.
How about I resubmit my submission with your comment in description. You gonna approve if finally because it is a valid portal.
Lol. If it supports my argument. Then it's a valid portal....
You didnt answer my question.
@TimerCIock I am paraphrasing an above statement below, can you confirm this is what you are saying?
It's so offensive I hope they do not respond. I can't believe this is how low they're going to support their idea
Are those examples currently in game as a portal?
Keep submitting your drinking fountains. No one is stopping you.
Absolutely agree and also makes no sense. There is no proof that any specific fountain existed from that point in time. Unless documented as a specific point in history and being "monumentally important".
Example: A restaurant that had a sit in, could be submitted for that reason as part of its history. I could 3-5 that depending on the history give.
If a drinking fountain had a plaque dedicating it to those who risked their lives to defend their rights during the civil rights movement. I could see that working.
Also, just want to say its very difficult to remember to make sure to put the word DRINKING in front of Fountain everytime just to make sure my statements are not taken incorrectly.
The Birmingham Institute has a segregated drinking fountain display. I'd 5* that!
But unless there are plaques about the history of a particular fountain, it's a huge (offensive) reach to use widespread segregation as your supporting argument for a portal of a park drinking fountain.
It truly doesn't matter what we say, I doubt they'd listen even if Krug says flat out they don't meet criteria.
Segregation happen and occured in maryland at parks. The poi's should be allowed. It shows how we have moved on from history. That now everyone can be equal and use the same fountains. It's a valid historic submission idea allowed for parks below the Mason dixon line. Northern usa wouldnt be accepted. It would be limited to southern states back at that time. Seems more important than a playground at mcdonalds in my opinion.
Part of history is learning about it. You'd be surprised how important some things are to some people. Elderly parks let them remember the stuff they have seen. My father passed recently hence my push for parks because he would remind me of where he came from in life and the things he has seen and done. That was done at a park. Parks have more history than people give credit for. Some common things are more important to our way of life this day and age. Then you guys would believe. People not being able to use to same water fountain back in the day is crazy for kids to believe. That is the historic educational value in making them. Because you are teaching the next gens what other gens learned already.
Drinking water fountains are valid.
You should be ashamed of yourself. I really am done. I cant have a discussion with this person anymore
You should be ashamed of yourself for not allowing history in the game. Wait niantic has something about history in game. They want it. Its allowed and to be approved.
Let me guess we should remove all the historical portals in the world. Because it reminds us of the past?
You gonna reject crosses for being racist? The american flag for not being a us citizen? Soldier memorials because you dont believe in soldier duties to the nation? All historical artifacts in museums if they have slave history. Its idiotic to think drinking water fountains are not valid in your opinon...
No but you just mentioned a portal submission that would not be approved and would fall under the "offensive" tab as a reason to reject. Why would you use a segregated water fountain as reason to justify why people should be able to submit things that are not valid.
'Nope. The other sign doesn't exist in game. The sign 1 is not legible so since it was near pavilion and playground marked 2. I labeled as sign 2.'
So let me get this straight... You have so many portals so close together in this park that they are denied based on there being no more room, and you complain that you need more? I also love the creativity that is apparently used in naming them... playground 14, sign 26...
@TimerCIock First off you have no proof these specific water fountains existed even 5 years ago let alone during Civil Rights. You are taking it too far.
You are mentioning segregation not for its actual history but to move an agenda and that is disgusting. If there was a historical plaque that actually explained the importance of the history that would be a valid POI. But saying someone during Civil Rights may or may not have used this fountain is awful. At this point you are just entirely missing the point of how this is absurd and offensive. While history can be offensive discussion actual history is usually educational, however, using something in this situation to push an agenda is very offensive, disgusting. Personally at this point, I think you should be removed from the forums, and the ability to submit because you clearly don't understand what is acceptable. I don't mean acceptable by the game terms, I mean within social/societal norms.
Blame yourself on that one. I guess we need to remove parks, playgrounds and sports fields because they were segregated back then too.
No. They fall exactly in cells they need too. There is plenty of valid portals. Just opr's being super picky about everything has to pretty.
Parks were around long before most players were. I played eyeball as a 7 year old on them. That's almost 30 years. And they were there well before me.
1960 is when the county took it over as Merritt park.