iNat’s top identifier algorhythm should not take into account people who just agreed with someone’s suggestion instead of the person who made the suggestion in the first place. This way, specialists who possees the knowledge on some specific taxa will always the obscured by some random dude who just…

As others have noted, all the leaderboards indicate is that a person has spent time IDing a particular taxon and therefore they probably have some interest and expertise in that taxon. They aren’t meant to measure skill or authority. The main problem I see with the leaderboards is that they do not …

re: profiles, specifically profiles that are “empty” because they have not been filled out at all (not saying Paul Dennehy’s is or is not, have not looked, but I just thought of this) When I go to a person’s profile page and am met by the absence of any welcoming info like, “I am interested in XY…

[image] ItsMeLucy: Then the empty profile person will offer a brilliantly specific identification and sometime carry on a mini conversation with the expert who tagged them that is incredible, specifying the why. I greatly respect these people. In my imagination, these empty profiles are olde…

[image] donna165: There are some IDers I definitely trust so I will confirm their ID after I have a quick look especially if they have commented on what pushes them towards that ID. Please don’t. Even the best experts make mistakes. If you can independently confirm why they are correct (i.e.,…

I never know what to do as an identifier in these situations… On one hand, I did make my ID because I was confident about it with the information available to me, on the other hand, I do not want an observation to reach RG unless someone else can independently confirm it. I feel like I should just…

[image] ItsMeLucy: superheroes just waiting for the bat signal Agreed, I know a few of these “empty profile experts” and tag them occasionally. I recall one instance where someone tagged me because they disagreed with an “empty profile’s” ID of a moth and wanted my opinion… little did they re…

[image] paul_dennehy: little did they realize that the “empty profile” guy was the first author on the paper that described the species in question but then it is a pity that info is not on his profile?

I know how you feel. I think observers often intend to express that they trust and value the IDer’s expertise, but I would feel more valued if observers did not agree to IDs they can’t confirm. I don’t have any consistent way of responding. If it’s a common species that is relatively uncomplicated …

You could also leave your active ID and use the DQA for ‘can be improved’ to hold it back from RG.

Yes, that is an option, but in my experience clicking “ID can be improved” typically causes more problems than it solves, because IDers rarely notice that it has been checked and it is easy for the person checking the box to forget that they have done so and that they need to remove their vote once …

[image] spiphany: because IDers rarely notice that it has been checked But they notice that the observation remains at “Needs ID” despite having enough IDs to make Research Grade. If they were aware of how that works, that would trigger them to look for that DQA box. So the question is how ca…

iNat's top identifier algorithm is broken

General

Topic		Replies	Views
Unknowledgeable commentators General	75	4791	August 26, 2020
Over a million identifications General	144	4461	April 7, 2023
Top Identifier deleting erroneous IDs to conceal errors- what to do? General	63	3160	October 30, 2022
How does it feels like to be a top identifier? General	115	3219	December 7, 2022
Crazy prolific but incorrect identifier General	75	5543	December 8, 2020

iNat's top identifier algorithm is broken

Related topics