iNaturalist & Mental Health

[jasonhernandez74]

@cthawley

the original topic - iNaturalist and Mental Health

It can be helpful, in a long thread, to revisit the OP from time to time.

@AlanM

And there were a few very helpful – and greatly appreciated – suggestions and pointers. Sadly these were vastly outnumbered by the condescending and demeaning, passive-aggressive comments from others.

I can see how discussions about moderation relate to that original concern.

@jnstuart

Not sure how you resolve this without specific examples. What one person might consider an inconsiderate comment might be judged by another to be simply a terse response.

Looking up the definition of terse, I find “sparing in the use of words; abrupt.” And therein lies the seed of trouble. While there may be nothing wrong with being “sparing with words” – and that may be the commentator’s intention – being “abrupt” is another matter, because it can appear to be “being short with someone,” which has the connotation of rudeness.

Compare these two comments:
“Strobilomyces strobilaceus is a strictly European species.”
“Strobilomyces strobilaceus is now considered to encompass only the European populations.”

Although they may mean the same thing to a mushroom expert, can we acknowledge that they may be perceived as different by someone who put in a sincere effort with a field guide that was published before the latest split?

[jnstuart]

@jasonhernandez74

Compare these two comments:
“Strobilomyces strobilaceus is a strictly European species.”
“Strobilomyces strobilaceus is now considered to encompass only the European populations.”

In my opinion, neither is inconsiderate. The second has more information than the first, but that’s about all. I’ve probably made comments similar to the first without thinking that someone might want more than that, although a visit to the iNat species page or some digging on the web would likely provide the missing information. Not every comment can address all needs…

[jasonhernandez74]

@jnstuart

In my opinion, neither is inconsiderate.

Are you

@jasonhernandez74

someone who put in a sincere effort with a field guide that was published before the latest split?

[jnstuart]

@jasonhernandez74

someone who put in a sincere effort with a field guide that was published before the latest split?

Sure, I’ve been there. And I’ve had to do some homework to answer my remaining questions. But again, how much can you ask of someone who is helping you by leaving a brief comment, even if it doesn’t answer everything? What responsibility does the observer have to ask a follow-up question if they need more? When I’m ignorant of the taxon, I’m always thankful to get even minimal guidance from someone who knows it.

[spiphany]

@jasonhernandez74

someone who put in a sincere effort with a field guide that was published before the latest split

I see no reason to assume that a comment that “x is a European species” in any way intended to find fault with the observer. It could be the standard copy-paste explanation by an IDer who is cleaning up a particular taxon about why they disagreed/changed the ID.

I realize that one might, as an observer, feel a bit hurt/discouraged that one’s best efforts turned out to be wrong for reasons that had nothing to do with a failure to research the ID, but I think it is important to recognize that this is not a problem created by the IDer and also that the IDer’s comment does not necessarily constitute a negative judgment of the observer.

We (the readers of this forum post) don’t know whether the IDer was aware that the observer had used a field guide or that the field guide in question was out of date. If the observer left a note, we don’t know whether the IDer in fact saw the note.

Taxon changes are recognized in different places at different times by different communities. What is a new split for one user may be just what the taxon is called for someone else – so the IDer may not even be aware that there is confusion resulting from out-of-date information.

My experience in life is that it sometimes comments have an effect on the recipient that was not intended by the speaker. When I am the one who is hurt, I find that dwelling on such incidents is not the best way to move on. I find it helps to consider whether the comment is objectively hurtful or whether it is hurtful because of personal factors (say, unhappiness resulting from one’s knowledge not being reliable because the science keeps changing). In some cases I may decide it is worth noting to the other person what effect their comment had on me, or responding in some other way. More often, I remind myself that the other person did not intend to be hurtful, and try to make my peace with it.

I don’t know that repeatedly bringing up a specific incident on the forum for arbitration, with people not originally involved and without full context about the motivations of all parties concerned, is a particularly productive way of dealing with it – I don’t see how it resolves anything for you or for anyone else.

[annemirdl]

I just want to mention that for example most German Newspapers have either closed their forums or strictly restricted them to paying users. According to their explanations they did this because these forums became un-moderatable for several reasons. One reason was that the posted content did have a major effect on the mental health of the moderators. Here on iNaturalist (forum and homepage) you have volunteers that moderate the content. Although often criticized, I think they still do a good job. In case of a problem, there are still a lot of “open channels” on iNat which you can use for communication. Other social Media don’t have these channels any more (eg. FB). If you face a major problem on iNat that affects your mental health you can at least try to use on of these channels, If one does not fit to your condition you can try to use another. As a matter of fact, in the internet you are most of the time cut off of some of your senses. One can’t simply see someone crying in front of the computer. If you then leave iNat without trying to communicate, no one here can actually help any more.

[DianaStuder]

I am terse
but text expander is a wonderful tool for me - I can carefully craft an informative answer with a link if needed. But just once! Then copypasta.
And if needed, I can go back and bash my text to fit updates (single subject and Ancestor Disagreement within the last few days :~))

[matthewvosper]

I think this is a really nice example from @jasonhernandez74. There is, of course, nothing wrong with the first one on an objective level. Depending on your culture, character and experience you might just take that as relaying useful information to you - which is no doubt the intention of the poster. Or it could actually pack a bit of a punch. For a lot of people, being wrong is an emotional risk. When someone tells them they are wrong, they hear an implied criticism - they may then tell themselves that the poster probably didn’t mean to be critical, but they still felt it initially. To take an obvious example, someone who has laboured under an unduly critical manager, teacher or parent, may feel that way - but it doesn’t even need that, just a bit of social anxiety or whatever.

Even just adding “Hi!” to the start of the message can assert a better tone, and it’s easy to do. I would not criticise anyone for writing the first - and I do think that readers should try to think the best of what someone has written to them and why. But we can perhaps make it easier.

Cultural differences can complicate things too. I recall a university lecturer from a ‘country with a more forthright culture’ (I shall not say where!), saying how he quickly learned after coming to the UK to work, that he couldn’t just tell the students parts of their work were ‘rubbish’ (not his word!) because they would get a bit upset! He had to find softer ways to deliver his critique.

[jnstuart]

I often post messages using my smartphone instead of computer and a real keyboard. I’m not good at using a phone for that (fat fingers) so I usually keep messages brief and to the point. If that seems rude, well, that’s not the intent.

[vreinkymov]

This topic is starting to make me think of the idiom about how one bad apple can spoil the whole barrel, where negative interactions in comments are the bad apple and one’s inat-experience is the barrel. There’s some research into how the ratio of positive to negative interactions is important. Hopefully there are enough good apples for every bad one in this barrel?

Also, although it doesn’t negate the feeings of experiencing negative interactions, I like that both iNat Guidelines and Forum Guidelines mention to assume that people mean well, especially when it’s easy to misread into what someone said. Maybe if the interaction seems negative, assume it wasn’t intended that way?

[annemirdl]

Let’s try to break down prejudices against certain countries and their cultures. First of all, I do not deny that cultural differences have an effect on peoples behavior and their way of communication. However, an elegantly worded insult, a deeply hidden insult between the lines or just a plain insult is still an insult and can have an effect on other users mental health. Among iNat users you probably find “bullies” from all cultures that have accumulated quite a lot of inappropriate flags over the time. From my side, I can only advice to look closer, take the victims seriously and encourage them to try at least to communicate.

[jasonhernandez74]

@annemirdl

According to their explanations they did this because these forums became un-moderatable for several reasons. One reason was that the posted content did have a major effect on the mental health of the moderators.

Who here is active on BugGuide? I haven’t been active enough there to verify this for myself, but someone told me that BugGuide forums have no moderation, but also almost no conflict between users. If that is true, I’d like to understand how they do it.

[annemirdl]

I’m not active on bug guide, so would have to guess. In the case of the newspapers, I did not mention an important point, because it will be off-topic. It has to do with changes in the European resp. German law. I’m not a lawyer, but simply spoken newspapers can be now made responsible in front of the court for their online content. That does include comments of their users. This is also true for other online platforms. From what I understood that includes iNat as well. Labour law (moderators) might have been also involved. I have a relative that is a lawyer of international law with emphasis on human rights. I could probably ask her for details. I just would refrain to post them here.
Concerning mental health of iNat users: just try to imagine a worst case scenario (which hopefully never happens) in which the posted content might become juridical relevant. What do you think what would happen ?

[tiwane]

I think this is straying a bit off topic in regards to laws, news websites, Bug Guide, etc.

IMO we all need to make good faith efforts to communicate in a civil manner, remembering that we are all speaking to an actual human and not a username, a human who has their own anxieties, vulnerabilities, and issues that we can’t ever really know the full extent of, and try to at least make an effort to not offend or hurt them. But I don’t think we can be responsible for every possible way someone will take our comment. For example, I’m one of those people who sometimes feels talked down to when I get a cheery comment directed my way. It’s not that person’s intention to make me feel that way at all, but everyone’s different.

That does also mean that if someone does make a comment directed towards us, we should also try to assume they mean well because we can’t know everything about that person’s communication style, cultural and linguistic background, how much time they have to write their comment, and whatever their own issues are. Sometimes this means taking a moment to process it and maybe ask someone else for their opinion. It can take good faith efforts on both sides.

In both cases this can be made difficult by mental health issues or even if someone is just having a tough day. I know that when I go through depressive periods, everything can seem hurtful or hopeless, including loving advice from friends and family delivered in person. If you’re experiencing something like that, I’d recommend taking a break from iNat or anything else that might negatively affect you and seeking help and counsel from trusted friends or a professional.

@matthewvosper

For a lot of people, being wrong is an emotional risk. When someone tells them they are wrong, they hear an implied criticism - they may then tell themselves that the poster probably didn’t mean to be critical, but they still felt it initially. To take an obvious example, someone who has laboured under an unduly critical manager, teacher or parent, may feel that way - but it doesn’t even need that, just a bit of social anxiety or whatever.

I really vibe with this. My initial reaction to being wrong is often to take it really hard. That’s just how my mind is wired and I try to remember that and move on to something else for a bit until I’m ready to accept it, be OK with it and use it as a chance to improve myself for the future, but it’s not easy and it takes time.

[jasonhernandez74]

@tiwane

remembering that we are all speaking to an actual human and not a username

I was just going to say something like this. I have seen references on the forums to a copypasta to use when doing a large number of identifications – which is fine, I have some copypastas of my own – but a potential pitfall is to get so caught up in sheer volume that we forget the individuals. To us as identifiers or taxon experts, it may look like 1,000 data points, to be dealt with as efficiently as possible. But behind those 1,000 data points are 1,000 individual people, with possibly 1,000 different reasons for uploading those observations. Our use of the data set could well be the furthest thing from their minds, given that we haven’t hired them as field assistants. Perhaps this should be kept in mind when crafting that copypasta.

[charlie]

Sorry, i am getting very confused by the format of the forum when i try to reply to more than one thing

In terms of the European example, it could be inconsiderate based on context. For instance, if the split is controversial but being forced through on iNat by a few curators who insist on then going through and disagreeing with the IDs of anyone who uses the existing taxonomy. Maybe the comment itself isn’t inherently rude, but the action could be. It’s important to remember that “X is a strictly european species” may be an opinion rather than a fact. if you replace it with “X politician is a bad politician” you can see that more fully.

In terms of bugguide, they rampantly delete anything they don’t like, so it seems more peaceful than it is. At least that’s my impression but i steer far away from it so i could be wrong.

[jasonhernandez74]

@tiwane

That does also mean that if someone does make a comment directed towards us, we should also try to assume they mean well because we can’t know everything about that person’s communication style, cultural and linguistic background, how much time they have to write their comment, and whatever their own issues are.

I try, really. But when a comment contains words like “stop ignoring the obvious signs…” (I copy-pasted that directly from an observation that I have open right now), it’s hard not to see this as arrogant. First, assuming that the signs are obvious to everyone, and second, assuming that therefore someone is ignoring them.

[cs16-levi]

I know this is quite a while after this post was made, but I have to add one thing. Something quite common that you might come across is “This is xyz because of XYZ” all correct, but then they’ll add “please always make sure you are certain of what you are identifying before you identify it.” This may come across as rude or nessicary and I personally wouldn’t use such wording as it is a little bit rude and it has a “I’m better” vibe, but it isn’t correct nor is it 100% correct. If you, to the best of your ability, made an id based on what you thought something was then you have done nothing “wrong”, BUT you could’ve done something irrational. For example, if you saw an observation and looked at the id and the observation and said to yourself “Hm, this looks fine, I’ll agree” without doing any research at all on the topic you could very easily be wrong as so many species look alike so using personal caution is always advised. Make sure to think, “is this really what I was doing, can I rethink and do better?” before you think “Oh my gosshhh this guy is so rude he totally could’ve done it better. Angry me.”

Inshort, people aren’t always thinking, and they aren’t always as kind as they should be, but as a general rule try to assume could intent and see, whether it be small or large, if you can learn anything. Lastly, but probably most importantly never ever let anything stop your passion for nature. Keep pushing through and don’t take anything to your heart that doesn’t belong in there!

---

I haven’t read this topic in full, but here is another example of how you could look at things:

Someone comments on your ID “stop ignoring such noticeable details, can’t you see that XY and Z are so obvious? If not you obviously shouldn’t be identifying This random species” Now, after reading that you might be inclined to think, how could you be so arrogant, and then continue to close the page not even considering what was said. Sure, you weren’t ignoring any features, but you can still learn from what he said. Now you know some new features for identifying the species. For the next part, “If not you obviously shouldn’t be identifying This random species” of course, you shouldn’t stop identifying, but maybe doing some extra research is in order after this to make sure you won’t make the same mistake last time.

Please, please don’t just stop using iNaturalist because some user was being arrogant. Maybe take a little break, move on and come back later and even tell the user thank you for correcting you where you were wrong even if it is really hard for you - it goes along way and it might just make the user realize where they went wrong if they re-read the conversation.