Is the iNat directorship taking iNat in the right direction and paying enough attention to the user base?

General
1

Given recent events, and past decisions that have left many users unsatisfied, this seems like it is a topic that should be discussed.

This discussion is not for bringing up anything about individuals or personal issues, but about the direction iNat has been drifting in recent years and whether decision makers for iNat are paying attention to and understanding the needs and concerns of the user base.

This is overall an excellent platform, but it increasingly has issues with decisions that had extremely predictable negative backlash (such as the Google debacle) that would have been completely avoided if the users had been consulted.

What are your thoughts on this larger question?

[EDIT: I just want to thank everyone for having a thoughtful and polite conversation about all this. Lots of good people here.]

42 Likes
Taking a look at iNaturalist's latest form 990 (2024)
2

It would probably help if you were more specific about what problems you think exist.

19 Likes
3

One thing that potentially limits the utility of such a discussion is that such a tiny (and non-representative) percentage of the iNat user base uses the forum enough that they are likely to participate.

Another challenge is that I (as a person who does use the forum regularly, IDs every day, has been using the site for years, lives near where iNat is based, knows members of the staff and board) donā€™t really feel like I know what the overall challenges and direction of the organization are. Mostly I like the experience, and see improvement. Some mistakes, as in the Google AI grant, have clearly been made.

I do think the organization could do more to communicate to interested users what the vision for the coming years is, but that is true of most orgs.

23 Likes
4

Itā€™s presumably a reference to things discussed in the recent blog post ā€œWhy I left iNaturalistā€ by Ken-ichi Ueda:

https://kueda.net/blog/2026/01/06/why-i-left-inat/

65 Likes
5

Ah, thank you! I didnā€™t know what prompted it. Certainly a lot to think about in that postā€¦

8 Likes
6

my very general, fence-sitting opinion is that

is a bit more difficult and nuanced than it may seem at face value. When reading through forum threads, it can seem like certain improvements, requested features, desired directions very clearly represent the needs and concerns of iNatā€™s userbase. But the forum represents a tiny, self-selected percentage of all iNat users. Over the last month, the number of daily ā€˜engaged usersā€™ [users that have liked or posted something in the last 24 hours] has fluctuated between 80 and 160. The daily number of ā€˜pageviewsā€™ (which does not represent unique viewers/users) over this last month has never exceeded 15,000. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people have used/interacted with iNat itself in the last month, so weā€™re talking multiple orders of magnitude difference in userbase

so I think transferring the thoughts, ideas, criticisms and more of the small pool of dedicated forum users, and extrapolating/applying those to the entire userbase, is a difficult task.

Even ignoring this forum/iNat dynamic, the iNat userbase spans an exceptionally diverse (in all senses/definitions of the word) range of different users. Purely looking at ā€˜interest in natureā€™ as a roughshod concept, you have everyone from ā€˜I just saw a bird land in my backyard that I donā€™t recognise, and I have a mild interest in putting a name to it, and my neighbour mentioned an app called iNaturalist to me so maybe Iā€™ll upload a photo to see what happens, but otherwise never really think about natureā€™ through to ā€˜I am deeply passionate about this tribe of beetles and know everything single thing about them and iNaturalist is a deeply integrated part of my entire lifeā€™, and then thereā€™s everyone on the whole spectrum in between these two end points!

By no means am I saying that I donā€™t think there can be some big improvements, both to features and the implementation/development process, and that staff havenā€™t made mistakes, because I think both of these things are true (in my opinion), but I also think itā€™s a very challenging and unenviable task to try to satisfy everyone.

I also broadly think that

is perhaps not the most accurate reflection in the specific context of what I discussed above, ie entire iNat userbase vs the small pool for forum users, and that

is a good example to highlight this.

I interact with many, many iNat users in any given month, most of them from Australia given that is my focus and where I live. This includes a wide range of demographics, and a wide range of different users across the spectrum I referred to above, spanning in-platform interactions, online presentations and workshops that I regular deliver (about iNat specifically and citizen science more broadly), in-person bioblitzes and nature surveys/walks that I regularly organise, lead and/or attend, Facebook groups, and more. Over the last 6 months I have spoken to many people (and by many I mean several thousand), both through online messaging and face-to-face about the Google grant, and asked their opinion on the situation, what they thought of the grant, the demo, and the general situation. The overwhelming majority (close to 99%) were completely indifferent and had no qualms whatsoever about it at all. It simply did not interest or impact their use of the platform in any shape or form, and so to them it wasnā€™t a debacle or a negative issue or something that made them angry or disappointed. I want to emphasise here that I am not saying it wasnā€™t an issue or that there werenā€™t problems with how it was handled etc, and I do not want to invalidate peopleā€™s feelings/thoughts about it at all who were/are concerned. Everyone is welcome to their own viewpoint and ethos, and Iā€™m not judging anyone for their thoughts, whether they agree or disagree with mine (which I prefer to keep relatively private given my role as a moderator). The point Iā€™m trying to make is that there are a lot of diverse opinions and perspectives on these issues out there, and relying solely on the forumā€™s voice will not always be reflective of the whole, or even part of the userbase.

I think what would perhaps be most helpful is trying to understand what user consultation would actually look like? What would be some propositions for how iNat staff can actually get an ā€˜accurateā€™ (as much as that is possible in a complex landscape) picture of what the userbase wants? Would it be a poll in an email with prescribed questions? An open feedback form? I donā€™t have any good answers myself, but I think itā€™s a necessary step to ensure that the broad spectrum of iNat users all have an opportunity to provide input (or at least, this opportunity is maximised).

34 Likes
7

Apparently some attempts to bring up this issue have been unlisted, in particular with reference to a recent event. Assuming true, it feels difficult to speak about this.

30 Likes
10

i havenā€™t made a donation or bought a new t-shirt since the google mess

9 Likes
11

Itā€™s late here so Iā€™ll keep this short but weā€™ve been doing user surveys over the last year (usually targeted at certain groups, like new users, people whoā€™ve made a lot of identifications, etc). Any survey will be biased as well but I think these definitely get feedback from a much broader group than the Forum would cover.

31 Likes
12

I am sure that I speak for many users on iNaturalist when I say that tooling around on iNat is my favourite hobby and the only social media I use. I find it continuously interesting and losing it would leave a hole in my life. I also donate to iNaturalist several times a year. Having said that, iNat is not my job and while I appreciate the fine work that the directors do, I do not want to sit in the boardroom and debate policy. (I used to do that when I was working and I am glad I donā€™t have to now). Best of luck with resolving the current set of issues and I hope iNat continues to deliver the excellent service it does today.

40 Likes
13

Since iNat has such a large user base in USA for financial support - I choose to give my time and my IDs. Altho the AI debacle triggered forum threats of rage quitting, I am aware of only one who rage quit - but lingers to yell at us. Have ā€˜hidden him foreverā€™.

Most of what I ID leans to people who came to iNat, dumped a lot of obs, maybe some enthusiastically WRONG IDs and Iā€™m out of here. They certainly donā€™t care either way.

We who are on the forum do care. And many scientists have dedicated years of their working life on iNat. iNat is old enough to have growing pains, and to be finding a new direction as we grow together.

Also the site stats, with the trend over 100 days - smooths out the noise and sends a clear signal. Thinking of the Cape to Rio yacht race steering a clear course.

22 Likes
15

Absolutely. Iā€™ve been involved in a few groups/organisations that have gone through just these growing pains. It is physiological and unavoidable. Just as itā€™s unavoidable that some will fall by the way. I most certainly would not like to be in the shoes of those responsible for guiding iNaturalist through these growing pains. Whatever road they choose to follow, they will inevitably be blamed and criticized by whichever group of iNat users feels their needs are not being met. Who will ā€œwinā€? The (silent) majority? The minority who yell the loudest? Who knows. But as Iā€™m not in either category, most probably there will be at least some aspects Iā€™m not going to like. Will I rage? No (although I may grumble quietly to myself). Will I leave? No. Because whatever happens, iNaturalist will probably go on providing me with a unique service (actually more than one), free of charge and asking nothing in return Iā€™m not enthusiastic to give (an ID here and there). Now where else, on or off the internet, can I find something even remotely similar? Could it be better for me? Yes, absolutely. But if it were better for me, it would probably be worse for someone else. Thatā€™s how these things work. So the very best of luck to those at the helm of iNaturalist in these stormy waters. Youā€™re going to need it.

20 Likes
16

If I am too specific in this itā€™ll get nuked like many other recent posts similar and more specific were.

Regardless, itā€™s best to leave it an an open question as Iā€™ve already provided an example of a decision that the iNat leadership made that went very much against what the user base supported. You can extrapolate from there. A

14 Likes
17

For what itā€™s worth, I filled out the survey for identifiers but I felt like there were several key issues that were completely passed over. While the survey left room for additional comments, the absence of these topics was something that I was only able to formulate later and thus could not include as part of the survey feedback.

These key issues that negatively affect identifiers include:

  • limited options for managing notifications
  • lack of tools for IDer collaboration
  • proliferation of wrong IDs resulting from the CV (both limitations in training and uncritical use of it by users)
  • poor user onboarding (which absolutely affects IDers, because we are often the ones who find ourselves having to do this work in addition to providing specialist knowledge)
54 Likes
18

An organization that must seek consensus for every move risks falling into a state of paralysis. This is particularly true for decisions that are relatively low-stakes; such as the Google grant, which was more of an experimental trial than a fundamental overhaul of the platform.

We are currently facing a technological tidal wave in the form of generative AI. It brings immense opportunities for newcomers, but it also poses significant challenges for established platforms. iNaturalistā€™s success was never built on being a static recording log; it has thrived precisely because of its forward-thinking appetite for new tools and innovation.

I think the reaction to the Google grant was shaped by a deeply fraught context. It is understandable that feelings are running high, but there is a risk that these heightened emotions might obscure the bigger picture. Ultimately, we are navigating two simultaneous storms: one a rapid technological shift, and the other a complex political and sociocultural challenge.

17 Likes
19

Given that science policy in the US is now focused on things like throwing books in a barrel and burning them, any citizen science effort needs our support.

24 Likes
20

I like this, Daniel. Iā€™d simply add that, in navigating these storms, well-considered, clear, and timely communication canā€™t but help iNat bring everyone along, safe and dry. :grinning_face:

7 Likes
21

I will second notifications and onboarding.

Notifications - not for me - I read all of mine. But for specialists who curate their taxon. They need more tools which they can apply to suit their own purposes. Against what must be an alarming tsunami of notifications - which leads to PM please I ignore all notifications.

Better onboarding, not only for Clean up on aisle 3 by identifiers. But because that is our window of opportunity, to catch and keep newbies. And to teach them how to iNat, our netiquette. Much more effective that fighting a runaway wildfire.

20 Likes
22

Iā€™ll echo the comments above about this being a case of inevitable growing pains. That doesnā€™t excuse any ā€œbadā€ behavior by anyone, of course (assuming there is any ā€œbadā€ behavior and I certainly donā€™t know who or what to point at). In my experience, it is very hard for any organization or business to grow beyond the interests and ideals of the original brilliant founders. It probably is also hard to find out what millions of users want, much less accommodate everyoneā€™s desires.

So, Iā€™m going to keep observing and identifying and donating and contributing to this forum, because while of course Iā€™m concerned about whatever internal issues iNat is dealing with, in reality I just want this remarkably-good-but-not-perfect platform to continue. Of course I want better onboarding and better notifications and better tools for collaborative work and so on, but iNat fulfills probably 90% of my needs, which is better than anything else out there. If the board of directors and/or staff screw up to the point that iNat disappears, I will be very, very sad, but I doubt that will happen.

22 Likes
23

I do find the misinformation followed by silence very concerning.

The announcement of the Google grant for developing a generative ai tool, then responding to backlash with false claims that they didnā€™t actually mean generative ai at all, only to release a demo that very much does in fact include generative ai definitely made me feel like we were all lied to.

Then, to add insult to injury, there has been no word on whether thatā€™s it, or whether they actually intend to roll such a tool out.

Iā€™m not ready to leave yet, but I have scaled way back on making identifications while I wait to see where this goes.

28 Likes