I think iRecord is accustomed to mandating a full name for all records, and making it publically accessible to posterity. Which is not bad, but very different to how iNat works. It seems like iRecord’s users must be a bit taken by surprise, because I had a look at the iRecord forum and they are very unsure how to handle iNat; one of the results is mass rejection of pretty much all iNat IDs since they don’t come with full names attached.
While I don’t doubt some useful records will find their way to new places via iRecord, I suspect few will under the current trend. We shall have to see how they respond in the long term; in the short term, concrete plans are in short supply.
It does seem in hindsight like this discussion should have been initiated on iRecord before the fact, not after it.