A guy uploaded the same photo of a flock of grey-headed swamphens for 10 observations in the CNC. In fact, he has multiple duplicate observations like this. I don’t want to flag them (after all, it might be an accident) . So what should I do?
[screenshot removed by moderator]
Also, I think this was done in good faith. The photos show a entire flock of birds, so it might just be that each obs is for each bird.
Either add IDs or ignore it. I’ve seen other people who do the same regularly. It can be annoying as an identifier, but it is not against any rules.
@thebeachcomber Why was my screenshot removed? Just asking so I won’t upload something like it again.
it showed the details of the user in question; we prefer not to include links or images on the forum that spotlight iNat actions/behaviour that could be construed as negative, and potentially result in backlash for that user
always best in cases like this just to speak generally and explain your example without explicitly highlighting who the person was
Ok, thanks!
If there are a lot from one observer - you can filter out that batch. Mark all as Reviewed. And move to ‘better’ obs.
I have seen cases of this where the stated location and time are different for each observation using the same photo from the same observer. Those instances seem like clear data falsification.
Yes, in this case, it’s fair to use the DQA on any observations that don’t match the date/location of the first.
You can also point them to the Count observation field if they want to record the number of individuals they saw
https://inaturalist.nz/observation_fields/188
I wonder if ten species in one photos are identifiable. If not, in the case they are plants, just ID them as vascular plants or angiosperms or something else.
I meant that 1 photo of a flock of birds was repeated again and again, under that bird’s id.
Hi. My first reply to the forum. I can see a way that a new user could misunderstand the role of the photo: that they need to show that they can id that species, not that they need to provide evidence of id for that/those individual(s) in the submitted obseravtion. Maybe that’s good ‘cover’ to let them know that they should be using a photo for the specific observation and that future multiple uses will result in the observation being removed. (“It seems that you have misunderstood the need for a photo: the photo is needed as evidence of identity for the particular observation, not to show that you are able to identify the species. Multiple use will result in the records being removed.”
iNat does not remove records of users. Records that are a serious violation of the terms of use may be hidden or the photos removed, but this is reserved for offenses such as spam, copyright violation, pictures of human remains, etc.
[edit, because I thought this post was part of a different thread] You might see some of the responses in this other thread for a variety of perspectives on why people might use the same photo for multiple observations. It is allowed – there is even a “duplicate” option on observations. In some cases (different species in the photo) it is even encouraged. Some uses are somewhat annoying for IDers (a new observation for each of 10 birds of the same species in the photo), but people often have personal reasons they choose to do this and the practice is not forbidden.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.