I think this kind of issue could be easily solved as part of some pretty minor changes that would also improve iNaturalist’s handling of taxonomy in general. I wrote a feature request yesterday, I guess we’ll see if it shows up there.
1 Like
Just a short reminder to try to stay on the original poster’s topic of reasons for opting out of Community ID (or not). If a new thread about database management/uses is of interest, that can be created and a mod can easily move that element of this conversation there so it can be continued.
3 Likes
“When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe.” :-)
1 Like
Why do I find opting out annoying?
Recent case: I am working through some spider taxa in Europe.
One species is so far presented on iNat by 14 observations. 5 of them are wrongly identyfied right now by two different observers. Boths are so far not reacting nor replying. So those wrong IDs now just sit there where they should not be and give a false impression on distribution of this species and furthermore might mislead other observers with their IDs that someone has to clean up again… and not too many people feel able to actually (to give you an idea… I am the top IDer at the moment with two IDs!). Let those observers observe and id some more and even the computer vision will be mislead.
That is why I hate opting out. I run into cases like this far to often. I spent a lot of time with cleaning up the maps and wrong identifications, and it annoys me that people are able to just undermine the system.
If people want to opt out for maybe valid reasons - fine. But why are they able to contribute to distribution maps and species lists? Now the real taxon is missing in that country where those observers are from, but the wrong taxon is displayed as if that species not just has been observed there once but even several times…
1 Like
Just use DQA.
2 Likes
How? Even if I use “ID can be approved” (they are not RG now anyways) they appear in both Map and list… it does not solve the problem
Instead you need to choose it can’t be improved, they go to casual, leave a comment and id and mark it so it’s not shown on the map.
4 Likes
But that is not right use of DQA I think, because ID can be improved… easily
1 Like
It can’t unless user opts back in, there’re observations with 10+ of correct ids and still on the wrong user id, that’s the waste of iders time, you do your best to change it, but there’s a moment where keeping it in needs id pool does more bad than good. Especially if user is no longer active.
7 Likes
Yes, the can’t/can be improved check box is about the community ID, not the ID currently showing on the observation due to opt-out. If the community ID is marked can’t be improved and is something different from the ID locked in by opt-out, the observation should become casual.
5 Likes
Ok thanks for clarifying… will work as long as the observer doesn´t click the opposing button.
1 Like
Get a spider friend to make it you two against one, if needed.
4 Likes
We have actually included the iNaturalist URL in our online herbarium entries along with the herbarium sheet image. I don’t know if we will get objections to this practice, but it hasn’t happened yet. An example is https://sernecportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=28924003&clid=0
3 Likes
That’s good to know! I include the URL on many of my specimen labels, too.
1 Like
For what it’s worth, I tend to view this as addressing a flaw in the database by doing it by hand. Which is to say—it works and it’s a reasonable workaround, but we have databases specifically so that we don’t have to do it by hand.
It has shown up here: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/improving-inaturalists-nomenclature-taxonomy/36143
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.