Yes - this kind of example was mentioned on the thread that @Star3 posted.
Many great points from different folks on those threads!
After reading some of it…I’m still not wholly sure I see a strong argument for the sourcing of names externally alone though, even if I respect that that might be iNats position atm. It just seems a bit arbitrary. At the very least… as @ahospers says on the thread, potentially… “iNaturalist can be a standard on its own…or be better than the standard”.
Yeah this is it. Ultimately, this is just another person not sooo different to myself… with a bit more in-depth knowledge on how to differentiate the species. I’m not sure I see why that specific knowledge of a bristle pattern might make them any better at creating a common name for a fly than anyone else. I don’t really see why I’m any less qualified at least (in this particular context).
Such great names! I love the plurality … and the way you can imagine them shifting in time, by location or use. Its nice just to see lists of all the names given and recognise them each as having a place. Its sad so many inverts don’t even have a single one on their list to vie for competition!