Implement iNat's automated negative check on "Organism is wild" only when Research Grade is achieved

Feature Requests
1

I think that the automated negative check might be improved.
I saw this observation, and it was marked as cultivated by the page, because of the first ID by the author of the observation. The problem is that it was a misidentification, and it was wild all along. Obviously when I made my ID de iNat page deleted the negative check.
Since a cultivated organism is directly tagged as “casual” the observation probably could become invisible for many IDers, and the error probably would go unchecked for a long time (maybe forever)
I think that a confirmation for the ID might be a good requirement for the iNat page to mark an organism as cultivated (if the other requirements are positive).

2

Since you can override an automated negative check with your own positive check, I think this isn’t an issue. A bigger issue is the tons of “verifiable” observations of cultivated organisms.

3 Likes
3

I think the issue is that what should be verifiable observations aren’t showing up in searches for verifiable observations because an erroneous ID led to it automatically being marked as captive/cultivated. So overriding them is possible, but not really practical if you never see them (although I think unverifiable observations should also be looked through). But yes I agree that there are probably far more captive/cultivated organisms that are “verifiable” than vice versa.

5 Likes
4

At first you need to notice this observation, which isn’t shown in many filters and projects because of grey status.

1 Like
5

I have no problem with having the software automatically label certain observations as Captive/Cultivated. But don’t be sneaky!

Whenever an observation is downgraded to “casual” there should be a comment disclosing the action and explaining how to fix any mistakes.

iNat goes to one extreme by letting disaffected members withdraw observations that have been commented on and ID’ed by the community and to the other extreme by effectively downgrading an observation without communicating.

7 Likes
6

Yes, but many people may not be aware that has happened. I’m guessing many there are a large number of users who don’t know about casual grade or the captive/cultivated checkbox and don’t really understand how iNat works (and may not really care).

Yes, either a comment on the observation or possibly better a notification which tells the observer what has happened.

Agreed, I don’t really know how that can be solved. I suppose it may get better as more cultivated plants get automatically marked as cultivated, though that relies on them being correctly identified.

2 Likes
7

I understand the issue, but I don’t think the trade-off is worth it - the issue of identifiers going through tons of observations that should be marked casual is, to me, a bigger one than losing some wild organisms to casual grade.

4 Likes