this is a place to discuss general policy issues and questions regarding geoprivacy, obscuring observations, and auto-obscuring. If you have specific feature requests related to this please post them as feature requests. This is more a place for general discussion. Please do not post loopholes or w…

Huh. Yeah didn’t realize that. Is there no rounding that results in something close to the current obscuring?

2 additional concerns under the law of unintended consequences -I fear it would lead to a significant increase in flags for inaccurate locations along the lines of ‘the map shows this on water, clearly it is wrong’ more concerning, if everything with 101m or above uncertainty is mapped to a commo…

very true, but the private property issue exists with the current system too, it’s less concentrated but affects more landowners (maybe all landowners in some areas?)

If people willingly post stuff from their property and show where it is, that is one thing, making it look like observations are there when they are not is another.

sorry if i was unclear, but that is my point too. the current obscured points also show up in the ‘wrong’ place that is also often private property so rounding them would cluster them, but either way they aren’t marked precisely and the map icon implies they are, at least a little.

[image] tonyrebelo: But can I make a request that observations that have a Locality Resolution (aka Accuracy, aka positional_accuracy) higher than critical levels also be obscured Related thread: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/create-filter-by-location-accuracy/298

It depends on what levels of obscuration are required. We explored this in southern Africa and decided that 100m, 1km, 10km and 100km are suitable levels for most situations, even though historically we used quarter-degree obscuration (i.e. 1:50 000 survey maps, or about 25km) for herbarium data. …

I would actually consider a totally different approach with one big caveat* for an obscured record, on the observation page itself, don’t show a point map at all, show an administrative map with the appropriate jurisdiction coloured in. If it was seen in Harris county, Texas, show a map that highl…

I dont like the idea of adminstrative boundaries: which level - magisterial, provincial, national. Some magisterial districts are huge, and it would be equivalent to several degrees of obsfuscation. Other areas are very finely divided - too finely to properly hide data. Using such a feature does…

I’m sure this has been discussed before, but why do observations where the location information is completely private go into the “Needs ID” category rather than “Casual”? Unless I am missing something, it seems like from the perspective of anyone trying to help with identification, there is no real…

Geoprivacy, Obscuring, and Auto Obscure Discussion

General

vynbos March 1, 2019, 4:24am 15

Topic		Replies	Views
Mass conservation status imports: Please do not auto-obscure non-threatened taxa that are not being targeted by people Curators	28	1813	November 29, 2021
Auto Obscuring Critically Endangered organisms? General	30	598	February 1, 2026
Updates to taxon geoprivacy and conservation statuses in Canada News and Updates	104	5464	July 29, 2022
Updates to conservation statuses in progress in Canada News and Updates	272	13832	September 28, 2019
Criteria for default geo-privacy General geoprivacy	61	3369	July 27, 2021

Geoprivacy, Obscuring, and Auto Obscure Discussion

Related topics