# Should I add coarser ID to an observation containing disagreeing IDs? **URL:** \ **Category:** General\ **Tags:** question, identification\ **Created:** [September 24, 2026, 8:58am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816 "2026-09-24T08:58:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![natbunn](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/natbunn/32/72321_2.png) [@natbunn](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/natbunn)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 8:58am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/1 "2026-09-24T08:58:52Z")
Hello! I’m relatively new to iNat and 90% of the time I only use it to post observations and wait for other people to ID for me. I’ve started identification just recently for Unknowns as an exercise, but I’m very much still learning the ins and outs of iNat’s identification system. Sometimes you come across observations that have community taxon bumped to a very coarse taxa like ‘Life’ because of disagreeing IDs. The conflicting IDs can be very specific (species/genus level). In this case would it be valuable to add a coarser ID (for example, class-level) that agrees with one side, or is it considered downgrading an ID and is better to leave it alone? ---
**Author:** ![DianaStuder](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/dianastuder/32/43358_2.png) [@DianaStuder](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/DianaStuder)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 9:48am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/2 "2026-09-24T09:48:10Z")
Yes – always add an ID to the best of your knowledge, for Kingdom Disagreements at Life. Unless the wrong ID is withdrawn, or reconsidered – the CID Community Taxon algorithm will need 5 to agree. 1 wrong + 1 Hard DISagreement, then ‘more than 2/3’ = 5. We need **all** hands on deck vs the algorithm. [Disagreements trapped at Kingdom (or Life)](https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?order_by=observed_on&order=asc&disagreements=true&lrank=kingdom&place_id=any) 176.6K (filter to your preferred Location, or Kingdom, or by Date or Annotation ?) Often easy to at least help to move them to a better / finer ID. Since my preferred filters are set to Date Observed and Ascending, this from 1969 is first (but only uploaded this June, so has NOT waited long) … Order … [https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/370897198](https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/370897198) Sort by Date Added and Ascending and we get this from kueda in 2009. With an obs number UNDER 2K. wow. [https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/1753](https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/1753) ---
**Author:** ![nyenyedzi](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/nyenyedzi/32/67600_2.png) [@nyenyedzi](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/nyenyedzi)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 9:56am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/3 "2026-09-24T09:56:59Z")
IDing is fun! I tend to leave things alone when I don’t know enough about the organism to agree to the same level, but I don’t think it hurts to add a coarser ID - as long as you don’t hard disagree with the lower one, and keep an eye on your mavericks in case you’ve made a mistake. ---
**Author:** ![roadside\_rambler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/roadside_rambler/32/60180_2.png) [@roadside\_rambler](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/roadside_rambler)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 10:27am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/4 "2026-09-24T10:27:20Z")
I agree with your advice that it’s worth weighing in on disagreements even if at a higher level. I disagree with your math. I think it takes 3 right to outvote one wrong, and we only need five right when two were wrong. ---
**Author:** ![grampianshiker](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/grampianshiker/32/50078_2.png) [@grampianshiker](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/grampianshiker)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 10:29am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/5 "2026-09-24T10:29:17Z")
Anything you can do to help the ID move in the right direction is great. If something is at Life, even putting it in the right kingdom makes it more likely people who can help move it further will see it. I occasionally look at such disagreements but in general only look at things that are at least called plants, so until someone gets it into ‘my’ kingdom, I won’t be able to help. Having said that, you will occasionally come across identifiers who don’t seem to understand how the system works and may complain about your IDs. At that point you have the choice to (1) ignore them, (2) try to explain why you’re doing it - some people are open to that, some really don’t seem to be, or (3) withdraw - which doesn’t help anything but I guess semi-avoids conflict. I do a mix of 1 and 2, though there are occasional identifiers who I’ll sometimes avoid ‘helping out’ an observation if they’ve previously identified, just because I get sick of dealing with the complaints. ---
**Author:** ![grampianshiker](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/grampianshiker/32/50078_2.png) [@grampianshiker](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/grampianshiker)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 10:33am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/6 "2026-09-24T10:33:22Z")
She’s bringing Ancestor Disagreements into the equation - disagreeing to kingdom level if the lowest common level was, say, class, effectively means that the initial disagree-er is disagreeing with the correct ID and needs extra IDs to overcome that (so 1 incorrect ID plus one Ancestor Disagreement requires 5 correct IDs). ---
**Author:** ![roadside\_rambler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/roadside_rambler/32/60180_2.png) [@roadside\_rambler](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/roadside_rambler)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 10:39am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/7 "2026-09-24T10:39:47Z")
Oh, got it! ---
**Author:** ![DianaStuder](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/dianastuder/32/43358_2.png) [@DianaStuder](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/DianaStuder)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 11:07am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/8 "2026-09-24T11:07:10Z")
I have a copypasta for my comments – iNatters have battled that … algorithm since 2019. And counting ? > [https://www.inaturalist.org/posts/25514-clarifying-ancestor-disagreements](https://www.inaturalist.org/posts/25514-clarifying-ancestor-disagreements) > iNat’s own explanation. With years of comments back to June 2019. ---
**Author:** ![natbunn](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/natbunn/32/72321_2.png) [@natbunn](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/natbunn)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 12:38pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/9 "2026-09-24T12:38:14Z")
Thank you, that’s very helpful. Definitely shines a light on how disagreements work. ---
**Author:** ![kgottwald](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/kgottwald/32/67454_2.png) [@kgottwald](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/kgottwald)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 4:58pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/10 "2026-09-24T16:58:23Z")
I add lots of coarse IDs if it will help improve the current community ID. If an observation has: insect \> spider \> jumping spider, the community ID is “arthropod”. I’ll ID as spider, and now the community ID is “spider”. I’m not disagreeing with the jumping spider ID, it’s just not a level I’m comfortable IDing to, and figure the overall change from arthropod to spider as the community ID is the correct move. ---
**Author:** ![hannadv](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/hannadv/32/43809_2.png) [@hannadv](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/hannadv)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2026, 7:29pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/11 "2026-09-24T19:29:47Z")
Adding a broader ID never hurts, it can only help. ---
**Author:** ![cthawley](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/cthawley/32/1445_2.png) [@cthawley](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/cthawley)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2026, 12:31am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/12 "2026-09-25T00:31:26Z")
Unless it is an incorrect broader ID. In that case it will make it harder to correct the CID. ---
**Author:** ![jdmore](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/jdmore/32/1116_2.png) [@jdmore](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/jdmore)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2026, 10:22pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/should-i-add-coarser-id-to-an-observation-containing-disagreeing-ids/85816/13 "2026-09-26T22:22:20Z")
> [@DianaStuder](#): > > always add an ID to the best of your knowledge, for Kingdom Disagreements at Life I would just add one caveat for the OP - be aware that some Kingdom disagreements result from disagreements about which organism to identify in a photograph. Is it the insect gall, or the plant hosting it? For example. In these cases, if the observer has made it clear through their own ID or a comment which organism is the focus, that choice should be honored. If there is no clear indication, it is best to @ ask the observer what their focus is, before adding a coarse ID that may be on the path not intended by the observer.