Seeing threads about people gaming the system to reach a high number of identifications …. Seeing firsthand, newcomers adding and agreeing to incorrect IDs without realising the impact on the dataset… Seeing the mistakes amateur identifiers make even when well-intentioned (myself included!) Heari…

I have heard of Gerald, but what is this about the South African Julia Skimmer?

Please write to staff if you encounter an inappropriate behaviour like that.

[image] thomaseverest: And the big question remains: what is an expert? A museum or university employee? Someone with X number of publications? I know lots of amateurs that don’t fit the “expert” category who are essential IDers. That’s a whole epistemological question. Still, while not sayin…

Ok, this doesn’t seem like its just going to die… So, I want to qualify at least a few things I originally said… My triggers for writing this original post have been mainly interactions with field “experts” offsite, but also field experts within the site, struggling behind the scenes. I am basical…

Secondly, [image] thomaseverest: what is an expert? A museum or university employee? Someone with X number of publications? I know lots of amateurs that don’t fit the “expert” category who are essential IDers. The potential difficulty in choosing a threshold for expertise should not sidetrac…

[image] sbushes: So, I have a choice. Do I blindly agree to his identification in order for it to reach GBIF? Or do I do some amateur research to confirm ? My preferred choice is to just leave it alone, since getting data into GBIF or achieving Arbitrary Green Label aren’t my goals.

I don’t think experts should have a more heavily weighted IDs. I’ve encountered a number of misidentifications made by someone who could be called an expert, but who also hasn’t been active in several years. I expect that if the individual was active they’d correct the IDs in a heartbeat (everyone m…

[image] mtank: how about something along the lines of an “I work with this taxon and am a recognised expert” check box, where people can signal their own expertise. I might be concerned that this approach may lead to individuals over-estimating their true level of expertise, whether innocent…

I won’t add much to this well trodden path. I like iNat, and don’t want it to become a research driven site. I maintain that it’s up to the researchers to confirm that any data they use is correct. I’d also like to add that many professional taxonomists are busy folks, who have their own jobs, and m…

Ok, I get that POV to some extent, if seen purely from the observers side… My central issue though is about whether iNaturalist is attractive to those with expertise and how we can encourage them to participate. Having an ID just sit in a “Needs ID” pool for eternity makes this significantly less a…

Why not empower recognised experts?

General

bouteloua July 15, 2020, 1:10pm 26

My preferred choice is to just leave it alone, since getting data into GBIF or achieving Arbitrary Green Label aren’t my goals.

Topic		Replies	Views
Why specialists should do identifications etc General	90	3247	February 4, 2025
Agreeing with experts and "research grade" General	117	14762	September 30, 2019
I'm a newbie needing expert advice: how should I deal with "proactive incompetence"? General question , etiquette	86	3207	April 26, 2024
Recruiting more identifiers General	287	26170	December 21, 2019
Implement an iSpot style reputation system Feature Requests	75	4606	October 5, 2019

Why not empower recognised experts?

Related topics