I don’t know if this has ever been brought up: I photographically record moth species by counties and months observed for our state moth database. I only require one observation for each species for each month. I moth every night, and when I upload photos for potentially adding new observations, I have to check many of the species (on a separately opened iNat. page) to see if I already have that species covered for that month. It would be so awesome if before clicking “submit” there was a way to notice which species I have already recorded that month. I can picture a box next to each observation that I am about to submit, and if the box is already checked. that means I have already recorded that species for that month. I realize that some species definitely need to be recorded every day that they are observed, but I also feel that many many very common species would be adequately represented if recorded only once per month by each iNat user. Yes, we need to know what months different species are being observed in, and if that is showing change, but for many common species, do we really need more than one observation per month? Should I have to open a second iNat page to determine whether o not I have a record of a species for that month? I can dream can’t I?
No, you shouldn’t create another page.
All species deserve to be uploaded as often as you want, if you already have a photo, then why not submit it? I record common species for 5 times a night, if they’re common they will have more observation anyway and it’s cool.
Did you mean to submit this under #feature-requests?
I totally understand what you are saying, and have no issues with folks doing that if they choose. But in my case, the individual that reviews my sightings does not need to weed through excessive sightings of common species, so I try to limit them myself. I also have limits on my time to what I am trying to accomplish, and would not be as successful at achieving my goals, were I to go down your chosen path. We are all on here and using iNat for a wide variety of reasons. What suits one person, is not necessarily the most suitable thing for someone else. Plus, redundant observations of common species could tie up “identifiers” time, leaving them less time to help identify more species for more people. By no means am I expecting changes to how often a species can be recorded, I would just like a feature that would notify an individual if they have already recorded that species in a given month (or other time frame) should they (that individual user) choose to know.
Yes, you are correct, whoops.
I’m sure there’re more than one person who can review your obs, if this individual don’t want to spend their time it’s ok, but are you sure they’re against it? Common species spend no time to confirm.
Wouldn’t it be that individual’s choice to filter out what they decide they want to, rather than you doing it for them? And then you could still post observations of the common species and let other users identify those?
If I might suggest another option – it shouldn’t be difficult to set up a spreadsheet with the moths and months on your computer, and then keep it updated on your own. That might even give you a better idea of which ones you want to focus on each evening.
Can’t you already achieve this with filters?
If you put the species of interest into the taxon box, enter the location you’re interested in, select the date range you want, and then enter your username into the user box, you can immediately see if you’ve uploaded an observation for that species/place/date you’re interested in. Yes this would require a separate window, but it should be quite fast and wouldn’t require a new feature to be created (for what I would imagine would be a very small number of users).
Or am I misunderstanding?
I am entering as many as 100 moth species or more at a time from a night with my sheets. I currently do what you are suggesting, but it would be nice if before I submitted I knew which species I already had for that location during that particular time frame(day, week, month, etc.) I realize that what I would like, is not something that most people would want or need, but it would be useful to me. I read some of these responses, and many folks seem to think that every single person utilizes iNat in the same way and for the same reasons. For my own personal reasons related to the specific research I am involved with I would find this very useful . . . to know before submitting if I have already submitted that species during that month.
Yes, it does look like downloading a report that includes URL links to the observations and to the images is my current best option. Since all species are listed in alphabetical order, he can easily skip the multiples.
I think it’s more that when you suggest a site-wide change that benefits your process, people want to
(1) ascertain how it will affect their own processes,
(2) ask about alternatives, not to force you to follow their processes, but to determine if there is an existing workaround that will serve as a solution in the mean time (feature requests, even if approved by staff, can take time to implement)
This individual manages our state’s moth database, and is not even an iNat user. He only goes to my moth observations to verify what they are prior to possibly adding them to our state moth database.
If he’s not even iNat user why do you strict your uploadings to his use? Create a traditional project for him and add needed obs there and he’ll review them there without seeing all others.
Fair enough, but it sounds like iNat is already helping you out with your work flow (or presumably you would be using a different process, which would potentially take even longer). It’s precisely because your use case is quite niche that there may be hesitation to implement new features rather than finding a simpler work around as a compromise. What would be the simplest implementation that would satisfy your needs? Perhaps it is not as much work as everyone thinks, but to demonstrate that you would need to flesh out the idea a bit more.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.