…. Ooooh… I don’t think I can agree with such an approach.
For one thing, the Computer Vision continues to improve and is a valuable tool.
Just getting things out of the Unknown pool for its own sake is not adding that much value or knowledge. I have often IDd observations at a very high level, but only after considering my resources and knowledge (admittedly, not all that much).
That blanket rule about Human is really unfounded. If it, * the subject of the photo, appears to be not wild, that should be shown with the DQA. There’s no call to mark it human just because of an artifact in the picture. * If the subject of the photo is clearly a curb or book, by all means mark it Human.
Going thru Unknowns is a good opportunity to give feedback and educate the new users about better practices for using iNaturalist.
I have a half dozen or so auto-text entries that I can add for newcomers with a couple keystrokes that give some insight in to how to get more out of iNaturalist.
This practice been discussed before. See more at:
*added for clarification