Why are species level ID's now worthless on "Needs ID" subspecies observations?

General
1

I just noticed that if I leave a species level ID on an observation that already initially had a subspecies level ID that my ID doesn’t mean anything anymore because the observation remains on “Needs ID“. Originally an observation like this would have become research grade at species level unless another person confirmed the subspecies ID. iNaturalist never used to be like this. I don’t know when this change took place, but I don’t think I like this change.

Most of the time I wont leave an ID on an observation unless I feel it’s actually helping the observation progress to research grade. In situations where I find a subspecies observation and know the species, but I don’t know how to ID to subspecies I’m feeling as if leaving an ID is a complete waste of time now. You’re not actually doing anything for the observer by leaving a lesser ID other than possibly annoying them with unnecessary notifications.

Does anyone else feel this way? I just give ID’s on random stuff that I’m familiar with, but I don’t have much subspecies knowledge. I might have to start avoiding subspecies observations altogether now as I didn’t realize until now that my ID’s on these observations have been rendered worthless. Does anyone know why this change was even necessary?

7 Likes
2

see https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/research-grade-with-only-one-id-at-that-rank/3270/

3

I feel similarly, and think the intended “fix” on the first problem has created a worse problem.

5 Likes
4

I think most of the discussion about the change is now being held in this blog post: https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/120950-revisiting-based-on-the-evidence-can-the-community-taxon-be-improved

Staff may be more likely to see your feedback if you post your thoughts there.

2 Likes
5

we’re working on digesting feedback on concerns raised by the community in this thread and weighing potential improvements. But we won’t be making any changes until January.

comment from loarie yesterday 23/12 on that iNat blog post

1 Like
6

I disagree with the principle of a different treatment depending on whether the ssp ID is the first one, or not the first one.

Moreover, the staff idea is (sorry, I reformulate) to give priority to the observer’s ID/intention, assuming that the first ID is the observer’s ID, but it is not the case for observations without ID from the observer.

3 Likes
7

With iNat’s 24/7 around the world - who is First - depends on geography, and working hours, and lifestyle, and real life commitments. First is ‘whatever’, but the consensus should count.

3 Likes