I have a feeling that currently the issue of overconfident CV suggestions has gained momentum in the forum community, as recently a wave of threads have been created circling around this topic.
Back in 2020, I made a feature request to tackle this problem, via implementing disagreements on CV suggestions in the learning algorithm:
I still feel this would be an elegant solution, as no curatorial steps would be needed to manually block certain taxa from the CV pool. It would just push the overconfident ID further down the list of suggestions and forcing the algorithm to suggest a higher level.
Another aspect why I am not in favor of forcing to stop the CV to suggest certain taxa is that in the future it might reach a level of acceptable quality again.
In that feature request, I imaginge that the algorithm, by constantly re-evaluating, and the addition of more species/photos to improve the training set, eventually the CV suggestions might reach a quality again, that it can distinguish similar species, and it automatically gets more ‘confident’ again
And lastly, it would immensely increase the value of those hard working identifiers, which currently might feel like a sisyphean task to provide disagreements to the ever increasing pool of mis-IDed observations