Why is this observation stuck at order-level. There are 4 IDs at genus-level.
here’s another example. seems to follow the same pattern. 1st ID is wrong… 2nd ID disagrees… 3+ IDs correct… but the observation still stays at order-level
Because the genus level ID does not have >2/3 support.
If you click on the About tab under Community ID, it’ll give the numerical breakdown. In this case, Convict Surgeonfish comes out to .667 agreement – the community ID needs to be anything higher than that.
2 Likes
So the complaint to lodge here is why does a disagreement vote for a higher-level taxon counteract multiple votes for a lower-level taxon. For example, User A votes Order (Actinoptergyii) while 4! other users vote genus (Platax). This seems like a flaw in the formula. That Order vote is essentially a protest vote against the first user’s incorrect ID, not against the subsequent user IDs. Maybe this can be moved to the feature request forum?
1 Like
see https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/25514-clarifying-ancestor-disagreements and https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/change-wording-used-by-the-system-when-downgrading-an-observation-to-an-higher-level-taxa/3862/95, though not sure anything has actually changed?
1 Like
It is a vote against the family, though, which includes the genus. If the dissenting ID had been to family level, it would not dissent with other genera in the family and the observation would have reached RG with 3 genus IDs.
1 Like
I fixed it. I know a convict tang when I see one :-) You just needed another vote.
1 Like