Each taxon page lists a Top Identifier – the person with the most IDs of this taxon (or its descendants). However, when there is a tie for the most IDs, it’s not clear who is chosen for this top spot. Based on previous discussions (e.g. here and here), I suggest that Improving IDs should break ties. In the example below, that would mean the Top Identifier would be luiscarlosrodrguezmndez. I don’t feel strongly about how to decide between users with the same total number of IDs and the same number of Improving IDs, but maybe others do?
i might even take this a step further and say improving should be weighted more in general, to discourage scoreboard behavior a bit?
i don’t disagree with the intent of the request, but i suspect that ties are rare enough events, with the default order being undesired in only some of the cases, that i would guess that the cost to query for this condition would outweigh the potential benefit.
7 Likes
Only if CV IDs (when a user selects from the dropdown list) aren’t counted with the full weight of “Leading” or “Improving”. As the CV becomes more accurate, the work of identifiers should fall more under confirming/supporting existing IDs, which is nearly indistinguishable from “scoreboard behavior” for busy taxa.
3 Likes