It’s frustrating given the volume of observations means “coming back” may take a long time, and in that time the observation sits most likely languishing as the WRONG identification. I would rather it sit with the community ID with the original ID as “maverick” until the day comes that they finally review the observation. Better than being banished to “casual” pergatory or sitting wrongly identified for years. Most times when you have pile-on of IDers long after the fact that means they are confident and/or veteran identifiers. Most “hit agree” type spam IDers tend to do it fairly rapidly after submission and rarely pile on like this years after the fact. I don’t think I have had a single observation where 5+ people disagreed with me and piled on a wrong ID. I HAVE had people pile on and correct me though and the community ID won out.
If anyone had posted a correct ID and had 4+ people pile on with a wrong ID which RGed as that wrong ID, I would love to see it.
I’m not sure I understand why “there is an observation on iNaturalist that is misidentified” warrants concern. There are millions of them. :-) And opting out of community ID is probably negligible as a cause.
Yes, there are millions of incorrect ID’s, but for me that’s a concern. I’m working to correct ID’s. I’ll never correct them all and I even add to the pile of misidentifications some time! But seeing them all correct is my goal.
Well, if it would not bother me, I could stop doing what I do here… difference between “normal” misidentified and opted out misidentified is that I can do something about the first, while the second often just remain misidentified… leading in the worst case to wrong maps and lists I cannot do anything about.
One of the things that motivate me is the feeling of cleaning up… But those ugly stains just remain…
Thanks, I will use that further… however, I find it really sad that we have to use such a hidden solution, most IDers will not know of.
IDers are for sure driven by a diverse set of reasons to devote their time on IDing… many of those reasons might not be really understandable for someone not very active in IDing… however, I think without IDers the site would not work out. Many people post their observations, because they would love to know what it is. I for sure would not post anymore if most of my observations would linger at “Animali” or “Plant”. This would bore me fast. I get that not everybody personal preference can be taken into account all the time. But shouldn´t it be a sustainable thought to try to adress issues that can easily be solved and would satisfy IDers in several ways… maybe because a certain issue is indeed solved… but at least in showing that they are be listened to and taken seriously?
I don´t get the downsides of marking opted out observations clearly. The observer decided actively to opt out. Let the IDers decide actively if they want to spend their time on those observations at least (and idealy even do not include non-disputable IDs in maps and lists… but that seems too much to ask for)… which is not possible if it is not even shown at all in the ID-tab… and leads to frustration that could be easily prevented…
Yeah, I agree. There are a lot of incorrect IDs, but the problem with opting out is that most of the ID’s can be corrected and the opted-out ones can’t be corrected. So it gives the impression of “I don’t want my ID to be corrected”, as opposed to the millions of others where the goal is to get it correct. Maybe that is not the intent, but it comes across as that! I don’t think the opt-outers realize this, or at worse they don’t care?
You can’t just scroll by, there’s no way to know without opening each observation, that’s why there was a request to add it to filters. You can just block people, write to them, report them, but calling the iders a “community cult id” won’t bring you sympathy in this situation. iNat is about community id.
I don’t get it. What does opting out has to do or not to do with you seeing or not seeing notifications? I do see my notifications.
Your sad example of your opted out friends is actually a reason more to not just globally opt out… Those wrong IDs will now stay wrong forever.
As Marina said, it is unfortunately not possible for us to just scroll on… I would love that.
Observers have a workable solution within iNat - they can opt out. Tick.
Identifiers would like a workable solution, within iNat. We do not have that. But for my regular slice for IDs there is only one observer I have learnt to recognise and, mark as reviewed. It bothers me when I am working thru Needs ID - sad to see obs that have been trapped for years with an informed CID hidden. Whether that is deliberate or unaware.
I’m with you on the second half, not so much the first. :-)
For me, at least, opting out meets the minimum standard of being better than nothing, but that’s like saying that a shoe makes a better hammer than a bagel. It does, but you’d still rather have a hammer…
If you post something on facebook, do you want everyone to be able to edit your post? But you still want dialogue. You just want the things you say to still be there, as the things you said.
In terms of my own emotional response, this is analogous. I want to be able to access my viewpoint, and the viewpoints of others—not just one or the other. If I’m forced to choose on my own observations, well, that if anywhere is a place for my viewpoint. However, the problem isn’t someone taking one choice vs. the other, but being forced to choose.