Definitely a specialist. Eastern USA & CA Bombus. Generalist to the point where I do frequently put broad ID’s from Apoidea, Bees, or Apidae.
Even though I love birds and am an avid birder, I dislike putting ID’s on them here because of the extra notifications.
I used to be a broad specialist in Texas flora… Now I consider myself a regional generalist. :)
I try my best to ID observations of many taxa in my narrow region of North Central Texas. I think it makes traveling especially fun – when I see something unique in another region, it sticks out like a sore thumb. Now, there are still loads and loads of taxa that I want to tackle (fungi, diatoms, itty bitty stuff) in my own region too. Always lots to learn!
Definitely think I’m a specialist, identification-wise. Put anything that isn’t a raptor in front of me and the best ID your gonna get is “probably not a bird”, ha
But definitely a generalist in general(lol), I’ll photograph anything and I love most animals
Assuming you mean specialist as in specialized in IDing a specific group of some sort, not as in an expert.
If so I’m definitely a specialist. I specialize in family Salticidae, and that’s pretty much it. It is an incredibly diverse family, so I don’t worry about running out of things to do or learn.
Exactly.
i’m generally special
I didn’t intend to be a specialist, but I’m a sucker for “hard” IDs. One group I struggled with is the vine genus Smilax, which has about 17 species in the eastern U.S., and many more worldwide. Once I got some confidence with Smilax in the field, I started to ID them to help other people out. Slippery slope! Turns out there are thousands of Smilax observations on iNaturalist, and most of them need help. Learning the geographic variations, the ranges, and the phenology of all the American species is a nice challenge. There are several things people confuse with Smilax, and I can spot most of them. The best puzzles are when three or four Smilax species are growing together and it’s hard to sort out who’s who. Anyway it keeps me humble because I’ll never get through them all, and there are quite a few where I just have to shrug and give up. Then I take a break and go for generalist ID’s of things in my region.
It is important to note that a specialist can be more of one than the other. Some people specialize in a taxonomic group, some specialize in a geographic region. Some are doubly specialized, in a taxonomic group in a geographic region.
My knowledge of plants is geographically broad, especially at the family level. I have gone on ID sprees where I look at a specific plant taxon without reference to geography, or the plants of a given region, but the region changes depending on how I feel.
My knowledge of the Antillean region is taxonomically broad, although not as comprehensive as I would like. I have gone on ID sprees where I look at a specific island without reference to taxonomy.
So, I leave it to others to weigh to what degree this is specialization and to what degree generalization.
An interesting twist on the question is: do you fall differently on this spectrum for observing than for IDs? That is, if you mostly ID one particular group, is the same true of your observations?
I post lots of different organisms but have a clear focus on moths.
IDing I subscribe to and ID Catocala moths. If you’ve posted a Catocala you have definitely seen me or Bob Borth in your ID section.
I actually haven’t! Though I only saw 2 of them.)
I love the key shaped idea! Thank you for sharing that.
Certainly I feel more a generalist, but in cave species I am getting there to specialist (but many things cannot be ID’d by photo alone, especially not the quality that often get uploaded here) - but is that still generalist as it is wide variety, just that all use caves? I also get very into certain taxa with intense special interest (woo autism!) which ebbs and flows with seasonality of what is around me, but generally sticks around year to year.
So yeah. Amorphous blob, or key shape - the old fashioned ‘steampunk’ kind I like to imagine with well defined varying depth teeth, is probably good for me :)
I’ve seen other mention this as well, but I aim to be a specialist in place and a generalist in taxonomy. I look at everything posted in south coastal Alaska and Haida Gwaii and post IDs to everything I can. There are many shared species in this area (especially of ones most likely to be posted in observations), but it is certainly the case that the further from my hometown, the less confident I am (and less likely I am to add an ID).
The ‘everything I can ID’ bucket is gradually expanding as I get to know more of the organisms in the neighborhood. My growth in this regard has been aided significantly by help from of taxonomic specialists who are able to put names on things in the first place, and I deeply appreciate the assistance. For many groups, the diversity where I live is fairly limited, so the hardest part is often simply getting the initial ID, but after that many things are relatively straightforward to recognize.
So and so. I have posted very few observations, none of a Soft-winged flower beetle, but almost all Insects.
This is definitely me. I used to be rather specialist (amateur though) of Japanese and New Zealand Molluscs, but as I participate to Inaturalist more and more I started to be interested in any other organisms as well.
Although majority of my identifications on Inat are still for molluscs (There aren’t much mollusc identifiers depsite the large number of observations so ID work would never finish), I recently became a generalist observer/identifier of all organisms I can observe, aiming to keep uploading 3 new species for me every day average at least until 2023. Fortunately New Zealand has quite a lot of nicely identified past observations being checked by experts and I am learning very quickly from them!
I think the best thing about being a generalist (at least to observe every organism seen) in Inaturalist is that you can intaract with much more people from all over the world compared to sticking with certain group of organism. This is just very fun.
Hah! That’s me too. I’m drawn to the genus Euxoa, most of which should be dissected to make it easier, but since I can’t, I’ve spent hours trying to identify one specimen. Eastern ones are not bad, but in the Mountains of the West, besides the things you mentioned, things like elevation and plant life can affect species distribution. I live in the flatlands, where the tallest physical feature is an old landfill site called Garbage Hill. Elevation is not something I’m familiar with!
Great topic. I specialize in being a generalist. 
However, over time I have found different areas of special interest based on trying to solve mysteries. It took me months to figure out what a Meteorus pupa was or a Campopleginae for that matter. Parasitic wasps fascinate me.
Recently I’ve been trying to learn more about Bryophytes. It is difficult to find good general information on liverworts. If you’re interested I have a video coming out at noon Eastern Standard Time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcnYfFtzmm8 I’d appreciate feedback.
I am not experienced enough to help with dragonflies/damselflies even in the area where I live. I have only been chasing them two years. That’s OK. The people who have been looking for dragonflies in my area for a long time scan the iNaturalist entries because they do an annual survey for the area. They want to know what is being found.
The unidentified birds are usually identified quickly. So, I don’t even bother looking at them.
Sometimes, I filter the Identify list to show just the “unknown” entries. I will add general categories like “fungi/mushrooms”, “insects”, etc. I may even enter “spiders”, “bees”, “flies”, etc. I know there are iNat members who are very knowledgeable in specific areas like this and will look for these general categories. This at least starts the identification process.
Hooray! Parasitoid wasps matter.
I’ve got a few Euxoa you could waste time on 
Nice job with the video! I learned a lot (loved the camel). Hope to know a lot more about bryophytes soon.