Nothing wrong was said, but true facts that everything is working as it was supposed and nothing is hidden on iNat, it’s one observation page that every new user will scroll down at least once.
2 Likes
It was already proposed, and still nothing is hidden now, grey marker is seen on casual observations in grid view, checking what you submitted is an expected action, no need to reopen each observation, casual observations are not hidden ones.
2 Likes
Checking captive observations once in a while is what I guess everyone does now, there’s no argument about notifications, it’s about calling words of other person what they weren’t.
1 Like
No hurt here. I have tried, to explain how iNat works.
Like many on social media, they would prefer it to be arranged ‘the way I want it’. (Deleted text as requested, since ALL their obs have been deleted from iNat - which is SAD)
Their philosophical, ethical view is a fresh one. In the family with the ones on languages, common names, geography, real names or 'nyms, faces or ‘random’ avatar, should species be named after controversial people.
YMMD and, on the forum, understanding how other people use iNat can be eye-opening.
But we are on a thread for trees were planted, or not. Apologies to @octobertraveler
5 Likes
@kaupunkilinnut Your name gives away which part of the world you’re from.
Re casual status. I was asked by a user whether a walnut tree I had covered shouldn’t rather be marked as cultivated. It is a large and obviously old tree, growing at the edge of an orchard, hence it’s quite possible that someone may have planted it deliberately. I have no idea, though, since walnut trees are native here and seem to be popping up like weed all over the place. The people living there may have simply let this one tree grow where is was because it was a convenient location for them.
But what does that mean for my observation? Casual, or not?
3 Likes
I would say that if the tree is not obviously planted, that it could have grown where it is through natural means (i.e., volunteered) even if it is non-native, then I would consider it wild. In many cases the observer might never know for sure – maybe it was deliberately planted decades ago – but if there’s insufficient evidence to say it was definitely planted, then I’d call it wild. Others might disagree.
4 Likes
Maybe stop taking it so personally? Working as intended means nothing but pure meaning of these words, it means there;s a reason to have it that way or it;s ipossible to change, or this is asked 10 times a day. You started argument out of nowhere, now you want to delete it all, please calm down and think about it all.
2 Likes
It should be made a feature request, I don’t remember there being one, there’re many things waiting to be implemented and everyone is agree it should be done, but it should be a separate topic.
2 Likes
If a word or phrase is ambiguous, please assume the person who wrote it meant well. We all come from different parts of the world and don’t all speak the same language (or the same dialects of the same language) so please allow for misunderstandings.
This discussion has gone quite a bit off topic, so please bring it back to the original discussion.
The notifications update we’re working on should include notifications if your observation’s quality grade is changed. That should include situations where iNat marks an observation as not wild, but I can’t promise that will be part of the initial rollout.
8 Likes
Really not a problem here. People have been helpful in regard to my original question. I admit to being surprised that the question has generated debate–I actually thought I’d be boring readers by asking about how casual grade is assigned. :)
4 Likes
This audience is not ‘bored’ by wild versus cultivated discussions.
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/are-culture-based-observations-considered-wild/23355/32
5 Likes
True. It’s refreshing really when I think about it. :)
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.