Platform(s): All URLs (aka web addresses) of any pages, if relevant: Description of need: To discourage members from purposely downgrading IDs just for the fun of it or for spite. It would also help discourage new members who have not read the site’s suggested rules of etiquette from accidentally …

There are so many unidentifiable observations that need to be corrected with an upper rank ID. So, if it would always be necessary to explain why an upper rank ID is provided it would turn out to be relatively to highly time-demanding. Definitively, it is mostly a matter of availability of time to …

Do you have an example of one of your own obs, which you feel was ‘spitefully downgraded’? I have seen joke or malicious IDs with a silly or patently wrong sp. But not using taking it to a broader ID - where is the fun in that?

Disagree on this. There are so many thousands (millions?) of bad CV suggestions, that requiring a comment on each of them would making cleaning up the mess incredibly frustrating. I identify grasses, and the CV suggests all sorts of random species for pictures of grass leaves which are unidentifiabl…

[image] DianaStuder: Do you have an example of one of your own obs, which you feel was ‘spitefully downgraded’? That shouldn’t be shared here, it could be negatively calling out specific users.

I completely agree. IDs are easy come, easy go in my opinion. If someone takes the time to type a message explaining their specific ID that they researched, I’ll take the time to explain myself if I bump it back. If someone just clicks the suggested ID on a taxon I’m familiar with and it’s not not c…

Why is it that observers always want to put all of the responsibility for communication on the identifiers? Two threads where identifiers have responded to similar suggestions: Dissenting ID Comments Would be Useful Request Documentation when research grade is changed back to needs ID I recently…

For some cases it is not easily doable, and given the amount of Needs ID obs still around I understand it is not possible for each (+ personal preferences, anxiety ect.). But when a mistake is widespread, it does not take much time to write a generic comment and to c/c it, and it can be helpful to u…

I don’t think I’d like to see this functionality as I think it could do more harm than good by discouraging people from making IDs or slowing down the rate they can make them. It also seems inconsistent; if we required supporting text for IDs that downgrade, why not insist on the same for those that…

I totally understand the desire from some users for explanations in these situations, but I really think the only workable answer to this is by setting people’s expectations when they start iNaturalist with a good onboarding tutorial. Those who are very engaged in their identification and want an e…

[image] swampster: My profile includes: Not everyone would see your profile. For example, profiles are not viewable in iOS.

Require a comment when adding a coarser ID to an observation

Feature Requests

lothlin October 3, 2023, 11:40pm 24

Very fair, and i really do try, most of the time. But sometimes I’m just not in the mental state for radio silence when i do try to ask for clarification and/or give an explanation

Topic		Replies	Views
User downgrading my IDs unnecessarily General	72	7409	July 8, 2019
Identification Etiquette on iNaturalist - Wiki Tutorials identification , etiquette	204	36548	November 3, 2025
Dissenting ID Comments Would be Useful General	49	2937	October 30, 2023
Comments made when suggesting alternative identifications (or corrections) General	20	2309	September 6, 2020
People making wrong suggestions General	127	7178	May 2, 2024

Require a comment when adding a coarser ID to an observation

Related topics