New pet peeve...years old research grade (and correct) IDs getting disagreed with for no good reason.
Publicado el agosto 12, 2018 09:17 TARDE
por dlcarterksu
Comentarios
Yeah, I too have been upset by this every now and then... But, it's also another good reason why it's totally ok to add on an additional ID to stuff that's already been ID'ed! Countless times I've seen folks brand new to iNat change a correct ID to a broader ID just due to learning the system. It's a reason to converse some in the messages, but it can be a bummer when the whole observation boosts back up to a broader ID.
If someone is doing that intentionally/maliciously...please flag the IDs. If it's a pattern of bad behavior the user should warned, and if it continues, suspended.
Ha! This reminded me of some kid in TX that was ID’ing everything as “armadillo” and his friends as “lice.” He was suspended, but I kinda miss the lad. ;)
No, it isn't malicious. It's just really annoying when an ID is research grade and a contrary ID is made with no reasons given. I know I shouldn't care, because it's no skin off my back, but I just can't help being annoyed. I tend to just delete those observations, though I'll admit to going to one person's page and misidentifying something and leaving an associated comment to please revisit my observation and explain. It was petty, but it worked, and I deleted my identification on his observation. At that point, I decided to take an iNat pause.
Yeah, I probably only give a reason for disagreeing like 5% of the time, I just add too many IDs, but if someone asks "why?" I try to take the time to leave a comment. Though you can always reject the community ID on your observation where that happens too!
Comentarios
Yeah, I too have been upset by this every now and then... But, it's also another good reason why it's totally ok to add on an additional ID to stuff that's already been ID'ed! Countless times I've seen folks brand new to iNat change a correct ID to a broader ID just due to learning the system. It's a reason to converse some in the messages, but it can be a bummer when the whole observation boosts back up to a broader ID.
If someone is doing that intentionally/maliciously...please flag the IDs. If it's a pattern of bad behavior the user should warned, and if it continues, suspended.
Ha! This reminded me of some kid in TX that was ID’ing everything as “armadillo” and his friends as “lice.” He was suspended, but I kinda miss the lad. ;)
Nah, not really missing him much. :)
Some users get really offended on here when friends take pics of each other and ID each other as dogs...to me it'd be an honor. I love dogs. ;)
No, it isn't malicious. It's just really annoying when an ID is research grade and a contrary ID is made with no reasons given. I know I shouldn't care, because it's no skin off my back, but I just can't help being annoyed. I tend to just delete those observations, though I'll admit to going to one person's page and misidentifying something and leaving an associated comment to please revisit my observation and explain. It was petty, but it worked, and I deleted my identification on his observation. At that point, I decided to take an iNat pause.
Yeah, I probably only give a reason for disagreeing like 5% of the time, I just add too many IDs, but if someone asks "why?" I try to take the time to leave a comment. Though you can always reject the community ID on your observation where that happens too!
At least you are probably correct when you disagree.
Agregar un comentario