I noticed this and i agree but i consided to difficult to write it down in english…Observations without phots are too difficult to enter and under rewarded (and i would like to export them from observation.org because they have such a nice and quick app)
https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/26012-france-inaturalist-world-tour
Another reason why many naturalists stick with other platforms is that iNaturalist is very good for punctual photographic observations but much less for systematic relevés without pictures. i.e. it is not as easy as in other platforms to encode long/complete lists of plants, butterflies, dragonflies,… without pictures. This is however typically how many more local systems work. The trustworthiness of each observation is then based on a combination of the rarity of the species in the region at that time, the difficulty to identify it and the reputation of the observer (which is difficult to make work in a more international platform like iNaturalist). It would be painful for an experienced naturalist to post a picture of every daisy (Bellis perennis) she/he would encode in order to have her/his observation accepted by the community…
Speed/easiness of encoding is key here. You could improve the interface for such kind of observations (you can encode lists on iNat’s web interface but without the taxonomic library which is problematic). Also having more localized taxonomic libraries (eg show only or first the species present in France or Europe) would improve and speed up the encoding. Also showing first the species already encoded by the observer when he/she starts typing would speed up the encoding of such observations.
You can use Wikidata for plantnames…does iNat use that ? https://ast.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantía:Wikidata_list
Trips, Numbers, Effort
https://www.inaturalist.org/trips
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/trips-feature-on-inat/3061