# Make Explicit Disagreement Separate from New ID **URL:** \ **Category:** Feature Requests\ **Created:** [January 31, 2020, 12:11am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/make-explicit-disagreement-separate-from-new-id/9840 "2020-01-31T00:11:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![saturnring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@saturnring](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/saturnring)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 12:11am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/make-explicit-disagreement-separate-from-new-id/9840/1 "2020-01-31T00:11:32Z")
It appears that Explicit Disagreements can be wiped out in taxon changes, undoing the work of identifiers. So it seems that there should be a way to Explicitly disagree with an ID separate and apart from offering a new ID. ---
**Author:** ![tiwane](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/tiwane/32/54612_2.png) [@tiwane](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/tiwane)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 12:11am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/make-explicit-disagreement-separate-from-new-id/9840/2 "2020-01-31T00:11:54Z")
This _might_ be more of a bug. Can you provide some examples? ---
**Author:** ![saturnring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@saturnring](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/saturnring)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 12:44am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/make-explicit-disagreement-separate-from-new-id/9840/3 "2020-01-31T00:44:46Z")
No, it’s not a bug. I was going to refer to this link [https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/inactive-taxon-taxon-split-glitch/9804/10](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/inactive-taxon-taxon-split-glitch/9804/10) but before I could go back for it I got the moderator-must-approve message. It just still seems wrong to me, even after the excellent explanations I got. I can just delete this now that it’s up, if that’s okay with you, because I know it won’t go anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![saturnring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@saturnring](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/saturnring)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 7:31pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/make-explicit-disagreement-separate-from-new-id/9840/4 "2020-01-31T19:31:53Z")
@tiwane, I guess I can’t close this myself, so could you do it, please? I’ve since concluded that opting out of automatic taxon changes could be a sufficient solution for prolific identifiers who don’t want their (correct) genus identifications backed up further, causing loss of the explicit disagreement to species. Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![bouteloua](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/bouteloua/32/1180_2.png) [@bouteloua](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/bouteloua)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 8:07pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/make-explicit-disagreement-separate-from-new-id/9840/5 "2020-01-31T20:07:17Z")
> [@saturnring](#): > > opting out of automatic taxon changes could be a sufficient solution for prolific identifiers who don’t want their (correct) genus identifications backed up further, causing loss of the explicit disagreement to species. In the example discussed on the other topic, the “old” sensu lato Anemone genus ID is of an inactive taxon, so even if someone has opted out of taxon changes, their old ID won’t count toward the community identification process. It has to be updated to the new sensu stricto Anemone ID to “count”. I think there’s something here in this feature request though, maybe it could be addressed if/when branch disagreements are revised. [https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/25514-clarifying-ancestor-disagreements](https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/25514-clarifying-ancestor-disagreements) [https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/change-wording-used-by-the-system-when-downgrading-an-observation-to-an-higher-level-taxa/3862/119](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/change-wording-used-by-the-system-when-downgrading-an-observation-to-an-higher-level-taxa/3862/119)