Every now and then I’ll run into an observation that has a question in the notes (e.g. “Is this behavior normal?”) that I do not know and cannot find an answer to. I always feel a bit torn about IDing these in the case where my ID would bring it to RG, as doing so diminishes the visibility and makes it much more likely their question will never get answered. By default I usually just skip these.
I’ve thought about other approaches, like leaving an ID but voting “Yes” in the “Can this ID be improved?” DQA and leave a comment about how they can just vote “no” to get it to RG. My exact approach depends on how likely I think they are to get an answer and the quality of the observation. I think in some cases it is good to tag experts especially if the observation seems quite unusual. Just wanted to hear how others approach these.
I usually just answer the question to the best of my ability and ID it. If it’s something really unusual or interesting I might tag someone who may know more than me.
I often specify the species in a comment and save it as favorite to follow up on those questions, and to keep an eye on the IDs given to it. I, too, tag more knowledgable people when possible but I also find myself DQA voting + commenting.
A good mix of both of your attempts, is what I do, I guess.
Withholding an ID to maintain visibility is a reasonable strategy in some cases (including this one). I do that all the time. There’s a stigma associated with “Needs ID” that really is unnecessary.
There is not necessarily a direct correlation between knowing how to ID an organism and being knowledgeable about its behavior. In other words, there is no guarantee that if the observation remains Needs ID longer it will be seen by someone who both reads notes and is able to explain the behavior. So I am not convinced this is an effective strategy for helping the observer get their question answered.
If I interact with an encounter where the observer has notes with a question I can’t answer, I will often try to respond in some way, even if it is just a comment “sorry, I’m not sure what is going on here”. This both acknowledges the observer’s question and adding a comment can help increase visibility for people who might be skimming observations in a particular taxon (i.e., people are more likely to click on it even if it is RG because they want to see what the discussion is about). If there is a relevant project I will add the observation to that, again based on the reasoning that this will tend to increase the number of eyed on the observation. Or if I happen to know a user who would likely be able to provide more insight into the observer’s question, I will tag them.
I usually respond to such questions too or might refrain from adding an ID if it’s a taxon outside my usual focus. I wouldn’t use DQA in this case, since it’s not really ID-related, and some users aren’t aware of this feature and wonder why an observation with broad agreement doesn’t become RG.