Are concurring ID's posted to a Research Grade observation useful?

Like @Thunderhead, I too like seeing an extra ID on my RG(Research Grade) observations. However, given the ratio of more observations to identifiers on iNat, it doesn’t happen very often and many of my observations don’t ever go into RG.

Therefore, I stick to identifying unknowns and plants in my area with 0 or 1 IDs, even if I only move unknowns into a broad category like Insecta (Insecta) or Arthropods (Arthropoda) so that someone who filters for them could narrow down further.

Since there’s a long list of topics related to problems of RG only requiring 2 IDs:

I think it’s beneficial if you are adding a 3rd ID because:

  • It shows that more than 1 other person reviewed it
  • It gives observer and previous identifier more confidence
  • It gives you more confidence since it’s already RG

There’s always a risk it can get carried away, like the infamous Gerald the Muskrat (warning: hundreds of IDs and comments - may overload browser) discussed in topic: How did the observation of Gerald the Muskrat go viral on inaturalist?

7 Likes