- Explore community
I draw your attention to observation:
One of iSpot's regular and competent members has identified the photograph as Ganoderma, a large and usually very obvious brown fungus (though the individual species are tricky). Five agreements have been added (plus two more separate, redundant revisions by the original poster).
Yet there is no Ganoderma, or any other macrofungus in the photograph! [at least not at 2.00am, Saturday 10th September].
How could six people, with quite a lot of reputation between them, all make such a mistake?
Were they all at the same and evidently rather alcoholic party? Or is there a completely invisible species in the genus?
Or, has the photograph been removed? This seems the most likely explanation.
A revision, once added, cannot be removed. This is sensible and right, embarrassing as it may be at times (though some limited facility to edit typos would be nice). But evidently, the photo that is the subject of the ID can be removed or changed! This is at best a disservice to those who provide IDs, and could constitute serious misrepresentation of their abilities.
I am a little uneasy about any editing to an observation once others have contributed to it, but removing or changing photographs after someone else has added a revision or comment should not be possible. I also suggest that if a further photo is added, as is sometimes useful, it should be clearly date-stamped to show it was not part of the original observation and may postdate IDs or other contributions.