[This is a question just for curiocity. There is absolutely no “best” way to post, as people have different purposes, but I believe that it is often useful to know what others do]
As I see people’s observations, I find it interesting how people are deciding what they post on iNaturalist.
For example, one posts little number of observations of uncommon things, or marine organisms only, or random things they find at random times, or a lot of the same species.
I used to post uncommon marine molluscs only for about two years, but now I am addicted to learn new taxa and so post as many taxa from as many habitats and localities as possible.
My current criteria of what to post (what to photograph) is:
・Habitat: Any (Land, freshwater, marine + a little bit of fossil), however missing deep water at the moment.
・Group of organisms: Any, however missing whole bunch of microscopic things (<0.5 mm) due to the lack of needed equipments (which I am trying to get).
・Any taxa I have not posted, or anything unusual (excluding most captive ones)
・Anything that has not been recorded frequently in the area (Often smaller, obscure species which most people overlook: for example, small invertebrates, bryophytes, and small fungi)
・Anything that iNat’s Computer Vision have not recognized yet
・Anything that is in good condition for identification (e.g. flowering) or in state I have not posted (e.g. egg)
And during bioblitz and trips, I simply post as many taxa as possible.
I try to avoid posting same taxa from same area and time, unless it is something uncommon, highly variable or something that someone or I might research on.
Because of this bias, I often don’t have many observations of commonly recognized species while having many observations of things that most people overlook. I believe that this is good for the site to stay balanced, considering that a lot of users mainly post commonly recognized species.
How about you?