@TimerCIock what does the table say? You still haven't answered. I don't need a picture. It should be easy to answer this but I suspect the reason why you aren't
Picture is worth a thousand words, you will have to wait patiently until I get to the park. If I post the wrong language your going to hold it against me otherwise.
W9Q29: Heather Havis ('HeterTheMoth') - What is your opinion of portals which are located on tiny, uninhabited islets in the ocean, accessible only by private boats*?
W9A29: These sort of questions are very very subjective and a general answer is always dangerous to give because of that. With that said, in general, this doesn't seem like a violation of the portal guidelines or TOS so I support them.
Q40: Sean “Vire5cent” Anderson - David Laight has asked a question on the following post, which regularly crops up in the appeals community, regarding how close a portal needs to be, for it to be valid. Most commonly, depending on the appeal type, the argument sways between the 40m deploy range and the 10m effective range of a level 1 ultrstrike. An opinion on distance would be nice, but an official ruling would be fantastic as it would end many debates on the distance factor.
A40: Great question. There are some examples of what to do and what not at https://opr.ingress.com/help. To answer the question of the example in the post that was linked, a fountain in the middle of a lake would not be a valid portal if you could only reach it by standing on the banks of the lake. In the past, some of these low quality portals have been approved. But these would be rejected today. Can you reach out and touch the portal via safe pedestrian access? That's the question to ask.
Q13: Peter Mee (Barthax) - When reviewing on OPR many submissions are in the middle of a road, for example, I find the need to change the location of the submission and I move it nearer to the object of the portal submission in a safe location. Does the Accessibility rating then refer to the original location, my suggested location or the general area around the object of the portal (i.e., not necessarily where the player will have to stand to execute a US)?
A13: The accessibility rating should always be about be for the actual location of the object.
-Bolded something you might find interesting
Q70: Adail Horst - What do you think about portal candidates located in internal area of residential condominium, with access restricted to local residents and their guests? What do you think about portal candidates located in internal area of companies, with access restricted to her workers and their guests (i cannot join to the area without company authorization and the company not allow join to play ingress...)?
A70: Not all Portals need to be accessible to all Agents at all times. Think of it as an opportunity to make new friend.
Q2: Aaron Almeida - Can you please clarify OPS position on Traffic Circles and Traffic Dividers. OPR and portal related.
A2: This is a very general question. The rule of thumb is - can a Portal be accessed safely. If you have to cross four lanes of continuous traffic driving in circles, it probably isn't going to be considered safe.
Q51: Could niantic release a statement that clarifies the term ‘safe pedestrian access’ as portal acceptance criteria please? In my interpretation ‘safe’ is related to safety. And as such should not be an optional feature that can apply if deemed convenient or the time of the day suits. Niantic is classifying portals on roundabouts as unsafe for the full day. Not just for the morning and afternoon rush hour, correct? A cyclist may capture a portal from a bike (not by foot). But the safety aspect should ensure that every time the cyclist would need to get off his/her bike (eg to avoid a crash), they can do so safely, correct?
A51: Safe. Pedestrian. Access. This is not safe vehicle access, safe cyclist access, or any other access. Pedestrian. Adventures on foot.
Q158: aza rine - Please clarify "community gathering area" meaning in terms of OPR.
A158: 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.
Q245: Richard Miles (TheGuvna) - Will there ever be or is there a way to appeal NEWLY submitted portals. My understanding in the Portal Appeals community is that they will not deal with any portals submitted since OPR began. For instance, a little free library located just inside a local grocery store... Repeatedly denied because it doesn't show up on Google Street View. Perfectly acceptable portal under the new submission guidelines and probably better than 90% of the LFL out there since it's actually on publicly accessible property and not somebody's yard.
A245: For better or worse OPR is governed by the wisdom of crowds. There must be something else with this portal. No portal inside a building would show up on street view.
Q46: Fadi Husseini - Hi Andrew. what is happening to all thoae roundabouts portals. most roundabouts in my country are small and SAFELY reachable by walking.. yet they are being removed. what is NIA's problem with roundabouts?
A46: NIA OPS says, roundabouts that have pedestrian access (have a stripped crossing lane, sidewalk around the roundabout, etc) are OK. If the player cannot walk up to the object on the roundabout, it will be removed. Note that access from a sidewalk next to the roundabout is not considered safe pedestrian access. To appeal, adding photos showing that the roundabout has pedestrian access would help.
Q51: Aaron Breen (Breenzy) - How is Niantic addressing portals and then fields made from restricted access portals? Many agents have quit and slowed down play, especially newer ones because of these large fields that can't be dropped, and needing to wait for the faction who put them up, to take them down. Do you consider such portals within the spirit of the game?
A52: I’m not sure I understand the question. Restricted or limited access Portals may be valid Portals if they meet the criteria of a Portal. There is not a requirement that every person be able to access a Portal. Both factions utilize these types of Portals globally and they have been part of the game since earliest days. Therefore, I don’t find them against the spirit of the game.
Q: **** Preston - When it comes to "Safe Pedestrian Access" - There seems to be discrepancies between the definition for locations in Europe vs North America.
In North America, there are these nice sidewalks, traffic signs, and such that makes an obvious "Safe Passage".
In many places in Europe there are many streets where there aren't many paths dedicated to Pedestrian access. There is more of a "shared" area with vehicles and pedestrians. (You would think that after 2500 years of civilization, they could define sidewalks - but that's for another AMA).
Should there be different criteria for different regions based on local guidelines and traditions that the community follows, or should there be a global criteria where "Safe Pedestrian Access" is the same?
A: It would be impossible to set a specific global requirement. We also have to default to local municipalities and their laws. What is required in Thailand for a pedestrian offset may not be required in England. But both are deemed safe by local laws. So there is essentially different criteria and why people of a region and familiar with places review submissions.
@TimerCIock Going through the old AMA's, I had to post them all as screenshots because the forum didnt like a word somewhere....
I believe the by reading through these "clearly written" responses from Andrew Krug & Niantic Ops you this should provide insights into a lot of your problems in this thread.
Eleven works well for me on the school/park issue thanks.... If it is left up to local laws...... Then k12 in Baltimore county is allowed by the dual use agreement that is established by the county government..... As the locations are used for recreation and have been used for recreation since 1952...
It is up to the reporter to submit the report and Niantic to review if those areas are not allowed. A removal request can occur at anytime by anyone.... (Learn this the hardway....)
It still doesn't change Niantics stance on NO to school grounds, this was also more about safely accessible items. Like in Europe there are far less sidewalks than the US.
Also some of these directly prove sidewalks are not required, islands are fine, submissions shouldnt be placed on the sidewalk...
The question isn't whether or not a school ground can be a park. The question is "can a portal be on school property", and the answer is a very firm "no".
No. The question was asking the nia policy of accessibility....
You say it's not accessible for a portal because it is on school grounds. Baltimore county has an established policy since 1952 and states they are to be considered parks and recreational use for everything but the school building. Than local laws dictate accessibility...
Do they have "Paragraphs" in you part of the Fantasy World.?
That post becomes a Wall of Words , and very difficult to understand your points. It had to do soemething with Boards, Dirt, Baseball, Fishing , Picnic tables , POI, and the Lost City of Atlantis.
That was me reading his response and realizing nia policy is per local laws for accessibility. Sorry, but was discussed in this thread earlier, so its still a valid conversation.
Answers
@TimerCIock what does the table say? You still haven't answered. I don't need a picture. It should be easy to answer this but I suspect the reason why you aren't
Picture is worth a thousand words, you will have to wait patiently until I get to the park. If I post the wrong language your going to hold it against me otherwise.
Who needs illicit drugs when you can just read this thread and lose all semblance of reality.
@TimerCIock Going through the old AMA's
W9Q29: Heather Havis ('HeterTheMoth') - What is your opinion of portals which are located on tiny, uninhabited islets in the ocean, accessible only by private boats*?
W9A29: These sort of questions are very very subjective and a general answer is always dangerous to give because of that. With that said, in general, this doesn't seem like a violation of the portal guidelines or TOS so I support them.
Q40: Sean “Vire5cent” Anderson - David Laight has asked a question on the following post, which regularly crops up in the appeals community, regarding how close a portal needs to be, for it to be valid. Most commonly, depending on the appeal type, the argument sways between the 40m deploy range and the 10m effective range of a level 1 ultrstrike. An opinion on distance would be nice, but an official ruling would be fantastic as it would end many debates on the distance factor.
https://plus.google.com/105960242885789012769/posts/Vrjsczt26g7
A40: Great question. There are some examples of what to do and what not at https://opr.ingress.com/help. To answer the question of the example in the post that was linked, a fountain in the middle of a lake would not be a valid portal if you could only reach it by standing on the banks of the lake. In the past, some of these low quality portals have been approved. But these would be rejected today. Can you reach out and touch the portal via safe pedestrian access? That's the question to ask.
Q13: Peter Mee (Barthax) - When reviewing on OPR many submissions are in the middle of a road, for example, I find the need to change the location of the submission and I move it nearer to the object of the portal submission in a safe location. Does the Accessibility rating then refer to the original location, my suggested location or the general area around the object of the portal (i.e., not necessarily where the player will have to stand to execute a US)?
A13: The accessibility rating should always be about be for the actual location of the object.
-Bolded something you might find interesting
Q70: Adail Horst - What do you think about portal candidates located in internal area of residential condominium, with access restricted to local residents and their guests? What do you think about portal candidates located in internal area of companies, with access restricted to her workers and their guests (i cannot join to the area without company authorization and the company not allow join to play ingress...)?
A70: Not all Portals need to be accessible to all Agents at all times. Think of it as an opportunity to make new friend.
Q2: Aaron Almeida - Can you please clarify OPS position on Traffic Circles and Traffic Dividers. OPR and portal related.
A2: This is a very general question. The rule of thumb is - can a Portal be accessed safely. If you have to cross four lanes of continuous traffic driving in circles, it probably isn't going to be considered safe.
Q51: Could niantic release a statement that clarifies the term ‘safe pedestrian access’ as portal acceptance criteria please? In my interpretation ‘safe’ is related to safety. And as such should not be an optional feature that can apply if deemed convenient or the time of the day suits. Niantic is classifying portals on roundabouts as unsafe for the full day. Not just for the morning and afternoon rush hour, correct? A cyclist may capture a portal from a bike (not by foot). But the safety aspect should ensure that every time the cyclist would need to get off his/her bike (eg to avoid a crash), they can do so safely, correct?
A51: Safe. Pedestrian. Access. This is not safe vehicle access, safe cyclist access, or any other access. Pedestrian. Adventures on foot.
Q158: aza rine - Please clarify "community gathering area" meaning in terms of OPR.
A158: 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.
Q245: Richard Miles (TheGuvna) - Will there ever be or is there a way to appeal NEWLY submitted portals. My understanding in the Portal Appeals community is that they will not deal with any portals submitted since OPR began. For instance, a little free library located just inside a local grocery store... Repeatedly denied because it doesn't show up on Google Street View. Perfectly acceptable portal under the new submission guidelines and probably better than 90% of the LFL out there since it's actually on publicly accessible property and not somebody's yard.
A245: For better or worse OPR is governed by the wisdom of crowds. There must be something else with this portal. No portal inside a building would show up on street view.
Q46: Fadi Husseini - Hi Andrew. what is happening to all thoae roundabouts portals. most roundabouts in my country are small and SAFELY reachable by walking.. yet they are being removed. what is NIA's problem with roundabouts?
A46: NIA OPS says, roundabouts that have pedestrian access (have a stripped crossing lane, sidewalk around the roundabout, etc) are OK. If the player cannot walk up to the object on the roundabout, it will be removed. Note that access from a sidewalk next to the roundabout is not considered safe pedestrian access. To appeal, adding photos showing that the roundabout has pedestrian access would help.
Q51: Aaron Breen (Breenzy) - How is Niantic addressing portals and then fields made from restricted access portals? Many agents have quit and slowed down play, especially newer ones because of these large fields that can't be dropped, and needing to wait for the faction who put them up, to take them down. Do you consider such portals within the spirit of the game?
A52: I’m not sure I understand the question. Restricted or limited access Portals may be valid Portals if they meet the criteria of a Portal. There is not a requirement that every person be able to access a Portal. Both factions utilize these types of Portals globally and they have been part of the game since earliest days. Therefore, I don’t find them against the spirit of the game.
Q: **** Preston - When it comes to "Safe Pedestrian Access" - There seems to be discrepancies between the definition for locations in Europe vs North America.
In North America, there are these nice sidewalks, traffic signs, and such that makes an obvious "Safe Passage".
In many places in Europe there are many streets where there aren't many paths dedicated to Pedestrian access. There is more of a "shared" area with vehicles and pedestrians. (You would think that after 2500 years of civilization, they could define sidewalks - but that's for another AMA).
Should there be different criteria for different regions based on local guidelines and traditions that the community follows, or should there be a global criteria where "Safe Pedestrian Access" is the same?
A: It would be impossible to set a specific global requirement. We also have to default to local municipalities and their laws. What is required in Thailand for a pedestrian offset may not be required in England. But both are deemed safe by local laws. So there is essentially different criteria and why people of a region and familiar with places review submissions.
'it is written' is actually a common phrase used in this and other threads by one individual 😂
EverytimeiI see it, I picture a person standing on a soap box in the middle of a roundabout.
@TimerCIock Going through the old AMA's, I had to post them all as screenshots because the forum didnt like a word somewhere....
I believe the by reading through these "clearly written" responses from Andrew Krug & Niantic Ops you this should provide insights into a lot of your problems in this thread.
First:
Second:
Third:
-Bolded something you might find interesting
Fourth:
Fifth:
Sixth:
Seventh:
Eighth:
Ninth:
Tenth:
Eleventh:
For the cat squad:
Literally just used it to be ironic because of TC
Eleven works well for me on the school/park issue thanks.... If it is left up to local laws...... Then k12 in Baltimore county is allowed by the dual use agreement that is established by the county government..... As the locations are used for recreation and have been used for recreation since 1952...
It is up to the reporter to submit the report and Niantic to review if those areas are not allowed. A removal request can occur at anytime by anyone.... (Learn this the hardway....)
It still doesn't change Niantics stance on NO to school grounds, this was also more about safely accessible items. Like in Europe there are far less sidewalks than the US.
Also some of these directly prove sidewalks are not required, islands are fine, submissions shouldnt be placed on the sidewalk...
It is no different. If baltimore is allowed to have school grounds as parks and other countries are not... how is that not the same.
Niantic allows parks....
If Baltimore has portals on K12 property, then we as mindful players are supposed to report them. Can you provide links as examples?
The answer was talking specifically about Pedestrian Access, either way those are school grounds which NIANTIC specifically said NO to.
People remember that "If google was a guy" sketch right?
The question isn't whether or not a school ground can be a park. The question is "can a portal be on school property", and the answer is a very firm "no".
No. The question was asking the nia policy of accessibility....
You say it's not accessible for a portal because it is on school grounds. Baltimore county has an established policy since 1952 and states they are to be considered parks and recreational use for everything but the school building. Than local laws dictate accessibility...
Great. Is it school grounds? Oh, it is?
Baltimore it's not school grounds. The dual agreement states the grounds are parks only the building is the school.
Do they have "Paragraphs" in you part of the Fantasy World.?
That post becomes a Wall of Words , and very difficult to understand your points. It had to do soemething with Boards, Dirt, Baseball, Fishing , Picnic tables , POI, and the Lost City of Atlantis.
I think.
Just to hone in on your central thesis here:
You're saying that Baltimore has legislation in opposition to the legal definition of school grounds, which is "the area around and belonging to a house or other building"?
What AMA was that from for number 11? @AgentB0ss ?
That was me reading his response and realizing nia policy is per local laws for accessibility. Sorry, but was discussed in this thread earlier, so its still a valid conversation.
Yes they are parks per local government, they would be accessible and allowed as local laws say they are parks not school grounds.
Any other considerations aside, if it's school property, regardless of other merit, it's a rejection.
If the empire state building was on school property, it would not be a portal.
Rejection criteria supercedes acceptance criteria..every...f...time.
Not sure, I read through the entire AMA archives....
It was talking about Pedestrian Access, while Baltimore has a dual agreement, Niantic honors their rules School = NO