When I ID unknowns, I usually start with the oldest uploads and go forward in time from there, often ignoring the last month or so of uploads. (Some people upload as ‘unknowns’ first to add IDs shortly after, maybe for technical reasons or because that’s their workflow. Some teachers have class assignments in my area where students are expected to do IDs and I don’t want to jump ahead of that.)
Like several others who mentioned page numbers, I like those, too, so I can set myself a limit for how many pages I’ll look through per ID session. This is mostly for psychological reasons realizing that ID’ing on iNat can get addictive, so I need to set myself limits to get other stuff done, too. I typically use location, time frames (e.g. per month), and projects to narrow the pool to something that looks manageable within a certain time. If there are few ‘unknowns’ to ID for my chosen filters, I may work my way through Plantae down the levels from kingdom to genus, or pick particular taxa for confirmation to RG.
Of course, exceptions apply. If there is a BioBlitz in our area, I may target those observations for immediate IDs rather than waiting a month. I may create custom URLs for a group of people I know or work with (e.g. students from a particular class, or local wildflower walk participants). I may do that to either ID their observations or follow up on IDs they’ve made for others.
I picked random because I change it a lot. If there’s a lot of pages for whatever I’m doing, I’ll jump around between them or use other filters to make the pages lower, like going by state or month. I don’t always do the same thing because sometimes it can feel draining, especially if it feels like I’m not covering as much ground as I’d like. I like to enjoy doing stuff when I am doing said stuff. So I try to mix it up in a way that it’s effective and efficient, and also enjoyable still. So it all depends on what feels good at the moment.
Is this query specifically in reference to the Identify tab on the website? or the Explore tab? or something else?
Both in Identify and Explore, the observations are apparently displayed initially with the most recently added first, descending by upload date. Choosing the “Random” order seems not to be a sticky choice. So I’m just lazy enough that I’ve never bothered to resort by anything other than the default, recently added. I’m usually reviewing specific taxa in specific locations (e.g. Geometridae moths uploaded in Texas), so the number of pages is usually limited.
I’ll often sort by newest first, but starting from page 10, so I can leave the easier stuff to other identifiers and keep them motivated. I’d prefer not to cream off the easiest IDs and starting a little way back provides still some identifiable photos (rare when you start from oldest first) and more opportunity to add value.
I typically ID unknowns because I’m not particularly skilled at IDing. I’ll usually do a few pages of “newest first” because it’s the default and then switch to “random” so I can see some older observations too, especially if “newest” is showing me a lot of obs from one person.
I don´t have a preference but actually like to switch it up regularly. I often try to get the most recent uploads first (same reason like others - motivate potentially new observeres), but after those maybe 1 or 2 pages I shuffle it up. I do some of the recent ones, then I might start from the back or use the random option.
I like the random option, but have the same issue as someone said before - no pagecount is given there, but I love the feeling to see it decline… so I will regularly use a different sorting method for a while again, maybe with the goal to “do only 5 pages more” or somehting
The observations that are a bit difficult I might push a while before I finally decide for an ID or to just mark as reviewed"… If I feel I ran into some I don´t want to decide yet several times, I shuffle it up again.
For context: I often go into a certain spider group (genus or family) and will chew my way through. At least in winter the new ones popping in are easily manageable at that level… even in summer it will not totally overwhelm me. I will keep up with those spider groups I have managed to clean up in a certain region… but then it is usually only a few pages a week for that level. It is for sure different then for “unknown” or “plantae” or even “aranae” observations that are constantly dripping in
I’m really not a numbers/analysis guy, I’m sorry. Since we all ID different things at different rates it’s hard to say. I do like @jasonhernandez74’s breakdown of each one, though, I think that’s pretty accurate. I’ve been trying to do more randomly sorted identfiying lately, which is fun.
I basically have one pinned tab for Identify in my browser so it’s always there if I want to identify some observations. Only problem is that the token for that page expires every 24 hours so you need to refresh page once a day. But when you refresh, it keeps all of your search filters.
No idea, I’m sorry. It’s a pretty hidden feature at the moment. I wouldn’t mind an update that allows one to see one’s own maverick IDs in a more prominent place, though.
Since we all ID different things at different rates it’s hard to say. I do like