I flagged it because a) this topic is about the issue with Explore, not about whether this was a bug, which is more of a Forum Feedback topic, and b) because it didn’t add anything constructive to the conversation. I chose the former reason when adding the flag.
If you have something to add to the conversation about how Location search works in Explore, that’s fine. If you have a specific problem with or feedback about a moderation decision, that’s fine as well, although should be made in Forum Feedback, and please explain why you think a decision was incorrect.
A post that just says “Maybe not to you…” does not add anything constructive to the conversation, even if the conversation had been about a moderation decision. There’s nothing specific about it, it’s just insinuation. If you have a specific accusation or criticism, please make it or send a direct message asking for clarification or providing feedback. Saying “I’m not sure “off topic” was the real motivation for flagging this.” is more insinuation.
Back to the original topic.
A “bug,” at least as defined here on the Forum, is when “something is not working the way it is intended to.”
The issues brought up here are definitely confusing and need improvement, but the software is working as intended: you enter text into the Location field, it searches Google and shows results in the dropdown. You click on a result and iNat tries to match it with an iNat place and, if it can’t, it draws a boundary in the area it gets from Google. The idea is to get you to the general area you’re interested in and then you can use other tools once you’re there, as I explained above. @pisum explained the intent and the problem very well above.
I’m not a dev, but coding-wise they’re pretty different because in the case of a bug, the intention and design are already decided, and it’s just a technical error that we need to fix (although the fix might be difficult). In the case of this search functionality being confusing, or needing improvement, that involves more thought, discussion, possibly design, testing, etc. So the approaches are different.
I think a lot of this could be solved by allowing users to search by polygon (either freely drawn or via KML upload or something), and have that polygon search be usable for a project - those are the two biggest reasons people add places, I believe. Then there wouldn’t be a “place” that needed creation. Easier said than done, of course.
FWIW, if anyone wants to export data from GBIF they have a nifty polygon drawing tool you can use.
I hear the expectation part for sure. I’m pretty sure we just get some coordinates and not much else, but I could be wrong. We definitely don’t get boundaries like the one shown in your screenshot.