I’m not sure what you mean by this. The emphasis you often place on iNat not being for data is contrary to my use of the site, and doesn’t make sense to me. Observations are intended as data points, correct? If so, how is iNat not for any kind of biodiversity data? If not, I have been thoroughly misled and see no purpose to uploading observations.
M, reports of an explorer from 17th sentury is biodiversity data, and it’s for sure not for iNat.
Sure, but Tony emphasized any, which to me seems to indicate that he thinks iNat is not meant to record current data either.
The website goals of interacting with nature and the value many find in observations also being data seem like they should mostly be able to align. Aside from current iNat policy allowing certain forms of duplicate observations, which many don’t prefer for abundance data reasons. I recommend anyone who values the data aspect to continue to observe and identify for it, since the data can be used in multiple ways or how each person chooses anyway.
I think he says it’s not for all kinds of data, I doubt Tony would say iNat is not for biodiversity at all.
Sorry, that was indeed poorly written. What I meant is that iNat isn’t for just any kind of biodiversity data, meaning that not all forms of biodiversity data are suited for iNat. It’s specifically for occurrence data of organisms or recent evidence of organisms encountered by the members of the iNat community.