Sure. I have dug into that dynamic on another question also! :)
But my query on this was different.
Essentially I now have an observation where:
1 person has given a coarse ID of “Flies” but not Psilidae…
2 people have given a species level ID …which is not Psilidae
So in this instance, all 3 IDs are compatible - there is no disagreement inherent in these IDs.
Typically, under the 2 thirds rule and disregarding the use of the disagreement button, these 3 IDs would take the observation to species…not leave it stuck at “Flies”.
+In this instance, I just think it would make more sense for the disagreement to be affecting any identifications which are Psilidae… but not all acalyptrate flies as @bouteloua explained.
I think I vaguely get the logic of it… but ultimately, I just think its counterintuitive…as its clearly not what the person who disagreed meant …When the user disagreed with Psilidae and bumped it up to Flies, I´m sure he wasn´t disagreeing with all Acalyptrate flies… he was just disagreeing with Psilidae.
So, I just think the effect of the disagree button is a bit weird in this situation.
And not something most people would know to be wary of…
Though, that said, I think a lot of people don´t know how the disagree button works either!
+In any case, also lots of other comments / threads about the overhaul of the disagree button.
So imagine this all might change at some point… :)
Annnnnnnd… you know, minor issue perhaps if I am only just realising it after 6000 observations! :)