Andrew Gorton's picture

Fucus spiralis

Observed: 29th December 2012 By: Andrew GortonAndrew Gorton’s reputation in PlantsAndrew Gorton’s reputation in PlantsAndrew Gorton’s reputation in Plants
IMG_0151
Description:
Identifications
Species interactions

No interactions present.

Comments

dejayM's picture

Marine please

I am visiting all Hornwrack posts in prep for my own
I am of a strengthening opinion that Marine Organisms should be marked (tagged) marine (please?). Coastal is quite correct for the Habitat found in (in some ways) but the desciptive tag Marine is essential for completeness.

JoC's picture

Flustra foliacea

If you are happy to tag your post as Marine, you might consider changing the title to Flustra foliacea which has all the agreements.

Jo

ChrisMcA's picture

Howcome this is still a

Howcome this is still a plant? - maybe if we all piled onto Gorton & then back it would switch to invertebrates.

dejayM's picture

I tried

that as soon as I got here. It's been ignored for years. I stopped short of adding an ID nut e shouldn't have to do that and, I discovered yesterday, it doesn't always work.
Notice that the Taxomnomy Panel is correct.
Andrew Gorton is still posting and still igoring a lot of comment almost never acknowleding other's IDs.
C'mon Andrew, change the title and add the Marine tag - please?
ðJ

ChrisMcA's picture

No Point in waiting then

I believe it will work given the plant power Dejay, which Joc & you & Gramandy have

dejayM's picture

Best left

Only the title is a nuisance (we can't alter that) - it has other Obs, iSpot recognises the Taxonomy and it appears in Other Obs too. I don't believe the group-trigger works when Likely is strong with agreements.
There are PLENTY of similar cases that one day will be 'coded out'.
ð

ChrisMcA's picture

That's why you have to make Gorton likely first

That's why you have to make Gorton likely first

JoC's picture

Agreement

Hi Chris, I am confused; firstly by your agreement to Spiral Wrack.
Secondly by your statement "That's why you have to make Gorton Likely first".
Is there something about the iSpot algorithm that I have misunderstood?
I assume the two are linked, but cannot understand; looking forward to some elucidation.

Jo

ChrisMcA's picture

It's a recent change in the

It's a recent change, JoC,in the way Ispot works; that when a post gets a likely ID (either new or changed) the group is checked & altered to fit the ID. It's been used many times to switch any previous inverts that'd been misposted as fish. You don't need to add a new ID here, just add enough agreements to make gorton likely & then all switch back to Bogey's ID. Yours & Dejays agreements should be enough.

JoC's picture

Forcing changes

Thanks for that, Chris.
I can see why you suggested it. However, I am not minded to do it because the title will still be Fucus. So only a small gain for no great benefit, in my opinion.

Jo

dejayM's picture

accepted

I accept that. If Andrew comes back and aknowledges any of this tnen fine.
ðerek

JoC's picture

This is Andrews post

The way iSpot is set up means he alone has the right to change certain parts of it. I think we should accept that.

Jo

dejayM's picture

Feelings

Origin 5th - edited
Yes I feel that too Jo..
the post has been asleep for years until I prodded it. The Group is ignored, in Taxonomy, by the iSpot Computer and I suppose the Title is up to the Author.
Chris's idea is to force Likely to Plant and then add a New ID of the Invertebrate. In theory, at least, that will change the group Icon (we discovered last year). I might, though, make a mess.

ChrisMcA's picture

I still

I still think it's ridiculous to leave it as a plant when it can be changed with so little effort