I didn’t say much of that. My suggestion was to be completely permissive about what observers can do, as long as following iNat policy. I meant they can* photograph. I’d never heard photographing is illegal, but wasn’t referring to legality, only to risk/caution. Anyway, suppose my idea was made into a Field. I haven’t fully thought about what the Field’s title/text would be, which could affect things. But I meant the Field would function equivalent to a comment, a faster and easier way to say the same thing. Note that the site wouldn’t be endorsing specific votes on Fields or Annotations, those would only reflect user choice.
Secondly, I stated the field would be almost completely lacking any “definition,” and be clearly specified/clarified to be as subjective as a comment. The Field wouldn’t imply or be based on “illegal” things.
On the one hand, I view this topic as a question over whether to do anything. One view is nothing should be commented to observers (at least not on Observations, vs. if iNat had related education resources elsewhere). Some users do make comments related to some of the issues which were brought up. Given that, I see adding a Field would be nearly identical. It’s still only a choice to even use. In principle, users could disagree with given specific circumstances others mark the Field, and for example delete deselect it.
Overall, I think if anything were to be implemented to give users/observers education or suggestions (e.g. cautions), it would be most effective, accepted, and abided by if it were added by iNat, instead of a field by non-staff users (although I understand multiple perspectives on that, such as that this isn’t the best place for that). A field maybe isn’t a good second option either. That’s all I can think to add about this.