High-level 168澳洲幸运5开奖网:Pokemon Go player Paweł ‘YMegaSnorlax’ Szczur has been suspended from the game after allegedly submitting “incorrect or inappropriate images for existing Wayspots”, Way🦩spots being the equivalent of PokeStops in Wayfarer, Niantic’s POI-updating system. He received the message after getting notified that his Pokemon Go account was being suspended for 30 days, a ban which will cause him to miss the Regional Championships in Lille next month.
Szczur is not the first to receive such a ban. Players have bee🌃n complaining online for months now that their submissions – which are, in their eyes, legitimate – have resulted in bans from the game they’re trying to improve. However, it’s unlikely the repercussions have affected anyone more than Szczur, who has already paid for his travel to France for the upcoming tournament that he will no longer be able to compete in.
Pokemon Go YouTuber Zyonik covered a week ago, discussing the grey area of banning players whose PokeStop nominations “don't fit their criteria”. However, it’s a complicated situation. The mass bans have taken off since a , which submitted hundreds of low quality PokeStops in The Netherlands, many of which were accepted. The stops have since been removed, but Wayfarer has been cracking down on extraneous submissions since, allegedly hitting innocent players in the process.
After the high profile ban of ‘GreenBeeV’, which Zyonik covered extensively, a Niantic employee known as ‘NianticAaron’ responded to concerns on the . “Thanks for voicing your conꦗcerns,” they wrote. “I assure you that the punishments are handed out after proper investigation by our team. We do not hand out punishments for auto-rejections by the system or for nominations that fall in the grey area. While our team may remove some Wayspots, they do not always trigger punishments. Posts on social media do not always paint the complete picture and thus may be misleading.
“We hand out punishments for clear violations of our policies that may include repeated low quality submissions, fಞake submissions, influencing reviewers, harassing others, participating in voting rings etc. If someone does not indulge in these practices, there is nothing 🧜to worry. I hope this clears the air and addresses the confusion. Happy Exploring!”
The key points are that investigations that lead to suspension decisions are made by humans, and that auto-rejections don’t automaticallyꦆ mean bans. A Wayfarer ambassador – an unpaid volunteer position that acts as a go-between Niantic and the players, and often tests new features, provides feedba𝔍ck, etc. – who goes by Andis , saying that they were “given some additional details that I cannot share”, which made them believe GreenBeeV’s ban was justified. Obviously, having not shared said information and regular players not being able to access it – GreenBeeV included, due to Wayfarer’s policy of obscuring exactly what you were banned for – this evidence is insubstantial.
Andis reiterates NianticAaron’s point that social media can be misleading, and people on the Wayfarer forums say that they have seen GreenBeeV’s PokeStop submission✤s and deemed themꦯ ineligible and the ban therefore worthy. Crucially, none published the evidence.
Szczur’s case is slightly different, though. They believe that the ban might be a result of updating photos on PokeStops where they’ve been removed. He claims that someone , and💫 his mass upload of updated shots may have triggered the ban. He also alleges that this person may have uploaded a submitted photo to Google in order to get the PokeStop removed (Wayfarer has with photos simultaneously uploaded to Google), because, in his words, they want “to destroy the fun of people here”. Whether this accusation is true or not, Wayfarer has not banned or punished people who previously uploaded their photos to Google, it just rejected the submission.
The only clarification Szczur received by email was that he was suspended for his submissions to existing PokeStops. Considering that bans can be authorised for submissions up to a year old, there’s a lot of data to trawl through. Szczur has been f🐬orthcoming with his submissions, uploading multiple videos of his email receipts and submitted photos, but even with this information it’s impossible to know the exact reasoning for his ban.
Many players are disappointed that bans for poor Wayfarer submissions are implemented in Pokemon Go, but there needs to be a deterrent for those submitting Waypoints with malicious intent. The only reason to submit a Wayspot is to have it appear as a PokeStop o🥂r equivalent in Niantic’s other games – Wayfarer is in no way a game in of itself. Bans in Wayfarer are irrelevant and can be skirted with burner accounts. Banning the associated Pokemon Go account, howe🍸ver, actively disincentivises players from moving PokeStops towards their houses or submitting stops for personal gain. So long as bans are issued appropriately, there’s no problem with this system. The problem is, nobody can agree on whether suspensions are appropriate or not.
Szczur has submitted an appeal, and plans to attend the tournament in France as a spectator even if they can’t co🧸mpete – after all, they’ve paid for their travel already. Whether their appeal is successful or not, and whether it’s in time for the tournament, are different questions altogether. Most of all, it’s clear that communication needs to be improved between developers and players. It’s no use relyi💦ng on one active forum member and voluntary ambassadors to try to clear up misconceptions with allusions to information.
Wayfarer needs to be clear enough a♒bout its bans to let people know why they’ve been suspended without giving away too much that would let bad actors know how to explo꧙it the system. It’s a difficult line to toe, but with better communication, these social media furores wouldn’t get so out of hand, and maybe more people would trust Wayfarer and enter their own submissions.