dejayM's picture

A NOTE in ID

If the ID panel contained a note to suggest that "Before agreeing, scroll down to check for ID notes and comments" I think that some issues related to 'blind agreements' might subside and it might add more value to accumulated opinion.
Maybe read here first http://www.ispot.org.uk/node/317880

Whaja think?

Reply

Comments

ophrys's picture

Agreeing

I think it is better for people to agree on what they see in the picture, not on what others are saying. There is no guarantee that what is said in comments is correct, anyway, so make your own mind up, I would say.

I don't really understand the issue of 'blind agreements', or at least why it is a problem. Incorrect identifications are part of the learning curve, and eventually most get corrected. Even if they don't, it's not a serious problem, is it?

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

gardener's picture

Incorrect identifications

Incorrect records can be a definite problem as records are automatically submitted to various recording schemes.
I was talking recently to a County Recorder who had strong reservations about accepting iSpot data for his area because of the amount of incorrect identifications.

ophrys's picture

Records

Records may well be submitted automatically, but no recorder worth his salt would accept a record of anything unusual without looking at the picture himself, surely!

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

Ray Turner's picture

No matter ...

... who/what the person/organisation submitting an ID for consideration.

Ray

Ray

Matt Smith's picture

Data

The Tachinid Recording Scheme gets a "Diptera Data Dump" from I-spot. After filtering out all the non-Tachinids, all the records are checked to see if either Chris Raper or myself have checked (validated) the ID of the Observation already. Those few that we missed get validated and only then does the data for those species where we are confident of a species level ID get added to the Tachinid Recording Scheme database.

Tachinid Recording Scheme

www.tachinidae.org.uk

TRS Facebook Page
http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Tachinid-Recording-Scheme/376652392364707

dejayM's picture

Blinds

No, I'm certain it is not a problem (blind agreeing). And I am, of course, impressed with Matt Smith's response to 'doubtful' or unconfirmed IDs - slightly off my original thread-quest though.

Here's another issue - that of 'blind postings'. Ha!
This puts up a picture, says what it is and moves on - say a perfect picture of a blackbird and an ID - 'Blackbird' - with no other comment. This now seems to be the norm.

The panels for Description and ID notes are far too often left blank. They can be SO utterly valuable to anyone genuinely interested in additional, more detailed, ID - (even, maybe specially, for Blackbirds).
See here, http://www.ispot.org.uk/node/320536
for instance (ID Comments).

Looking back through historical postings, additional information was nearly always given.
Derek

ophrys's picture

Additional

I try to add comments to postings when I can, but there are only so many times that you can go into details of a Blackbird's post-juvenile moult limit in the greater coverts...

It used to be easier because fewer postings were made. These days, the success of iSpot means there are just too many photos put up to comment on them all. Some of us do have a day job, too!

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

dejayM's picture

...a plea..

It wasn't a prod at Blackbird posters (of course Ian).
But, day job aside, it was a plea for more 'expertise' in posting.
My theory, it's only that, (but I am old enough to know)is that we'd all learn a lot more from writing and reading ID Notes.
I haven't been here long, regrettably, but it's ID Notes and Comments that keep me here.
Look here http://www.ispot.org.uk/node/27
It's a random pick (honest), but see how it generates informed comment.
Well, with YOUR posting and ID record, you knew that already.
Derek

ophrys's picture

Detail

I do agree with you, Derek, of course. I think that unusual species posted generally do contain detail and often do inspire debate. The vast majority of postings are of common species and inevitably will not have detail attached, though.

It's a useful reminder not to assume understanding, though, and to remember that many people on here do appreciate the identification pointers they can pick up, even on very common species.

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

dejayM's picture

a wee note?

Yep, funny how we agree on the sensible things.
Blind postings again....
Recently there was a perfect peregrine on the shore, not far from the front of the camera..
A few posts later, an Osprey in a cage. Not from the same person. I am loath to be more specific.
Without wanting to be spoil-sports can't we ENCOURAGE just tiniest comment, just a note as to circumstances? Or a little extra in ID Notes?
That's my plea..a wee note..
ðj

John Bratton's picture

If I was running a record

If I was running a recording scheme I would be more worried about the details of locality than whether the id. was correct. The scheme organiser can check the id from the photo but has no way of checkimg the locality data. I haven't looked critically at many records, but have found locality given as London and map showing Scotland; and another claiming to be from ther Dorset coastal path but the map showing a golf course a few miles inland. There must be many other errors, or maybe attempts to cause mischief.

John Bratton

dejayM's picture

ask..

Oh yes John. I have neither seen, nor used, Location Notes!.
Maybe we should, those of us who understand.
Leave aside mischief - ask for comments in a Comment. I am beginning to do that but, sad to report, I think few people have ticks in Filters, so never see my question.
It sums up blind posting.
Derek
later - MUCH later..(nearly four months!)..what about my idea of a note in the ID panel "please look at comments before agreeing..".
Own up, I know you don't look.

wolvobirder's picture

Reference specimen

I know it would probably be a good deal of work, but would it not be possible to have a reference specimen (or two) for common species that has (have) all the ID features clearly laid out and explained? That way we could get around the problem of a lack of ID notes for common species by simply posting a link or having an auto link to the reference specimen(s).

Alternatively/additionally, when an ID is given, each similar observation that appears on the carousel at the bottom of the page which has detailed ID notes could be highlighted by a coloured box? That way people could see where to go for more information.

dejayM's picture

something...

There's two issues there. I not certain I agree that 'reference exemplars' should be available via iSpot, as nearly all are on the web somewhere. EOL seems to do it quite well and has an auto link from most posts - http://eol.org/pages/467843/overview
look at Detail.
I would think it a poor show to, say, post Daisy and 'I'm as certain as I can be'.
I WISH for more observation comments or ID notes from all iSpot posters. A hint that the daisies are well behind this year in Norwich, or 'can someone explain why the petals are missing?' - anything really but SOMETHING as well as 'Daisy'!
http://www.ispot.org.uk/node/319702#comment-105389

dejayM's picture

Flag

It's time this suggestion was reviewed, at least discussed, again.
It is increasingly obvious that few people, when placing agreements or proposing IDs, are reading comments.
There is enough proof of this evident to close watchers that I needn't isolate any examples.
The suggestion is -
a Comments Present flag should be made visible near the top (NOT in the ID panel though) of all posts which have a comment. This is particularly important (I believe) for posts without an ID.
Now, I realise that the flag actually exists in a number of views - like >>This One<< but does not appear in individual postings.

JoC's picture

Flags

I agree with the priciple suggested, but I do not see what you mean by 'flags exist' in the link you give. What does this flag look like and where on a post is it precisely? Jo

Jo

dejayM's picture

flags and notifications

Well Jo.. if you click on my link above, you will be taken to the Observation List (I assume that some spotters actually view posts that way) you will see 'notifications' (I called them Flags, sorry), showing ID's, Agreements and Comments (where present).
The purpose of me raising the issue again is to highlight the (may I use the word?) annoyance created by those who do not read comments before they launch into a new or a first ID.
The most relevant purpose (of a flag), that I will mention here, just now, is to allow new members, or the less experience poster, to gain agreements by posting (practising even) the ID themselves - this is quite often suggested by more experience members. But there are also a number of times when notes are put up by those who have expert advice to give and which is ignored, often by those who have erroneously given an agreement.
This is NO great issue - none of it is really so important in these improving times* - but I do think it time to raise the issue for discussion again.
I fear that I have placed this proposal in an old thread, thinking perhaps that I should have started a new one.
ðj
* have I detected a huge improvement in the quality of postings and, perhaps, photography?

marksteer's picture

Please start a new forum

Please start a new forum topic! I would like to add my views without them getting lost in this somewhat convoluted thread!! Thanks.
Mark

The more I know the more I realise I don't know

dejayM's picture

Flags and Notifications

Thanks Mark see A FLAG for the Unwary.
ð

Ray Turner's picture

Photography

I know you threw it in here as an aside Derek but I am a little wary when it comes to people talking about the quality of the photographs.

This is not a place for photo competitions neither should, given a sufficiently diagnostic text, one be necessary for any taxa to give a committed confirmation of ID. Indeed this is supposed to be a site where a lay person can submit the blurry out of focus, distant object taken on a mobile and expect some sort of opinion as to what it may be.

I’m afraid us old hands, I am including myself here, and the experts are getting too safe and not offering opinions unless the image was taken with an 500mm f4 on a DSLR costing £0,000s (or the macro equivalent).

I should say good luck to all those who possess some nice gear and I applaud their images, well done guys and keep up the good work, this is not a dig at you.

Ray

Ray

ophrys's picture

Photos

I wholeheartedly agree with Ray on this. I actually started typing a very similar comment before Ray, but then deleted it cos dinner was ready! iSpot is for any photos at all and it is not a showcase for photographical excellence. I like the rather grainy, fuzzy, hastily snapped shots, as that is often the reality of a sighting for people.
A lot of the photos on here are excellent now, but usually they are just people showing what they have seen, rather than looking for an ID. There is nothing wrong with that, but let's not give people the impression that we only want photos if they are taken with a 500ml lens or whatever...all are welcome.

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

martinjohnbishop's picture

It is easy to take rubbish photos with any equipment

"Not offering opinions unless the image was taken with an 500mm f4 on a DSLR costing £0,000s (or the macro equivalent)." A bit harsh.
PS Rush me my DSLR costing £0.00.

I suppose a 500 ml lens is for aquatic use?

I always realise as I walk away that I could have done better.
You can't photograph the diagnostic feature until you know what it is.
But it is not true that identifications cannot be made from photos.
It is just that the necessary photos have not yet been taken.

I have been striving to do better. My offering of the day http://www.ispotnature.org/node/385768

Regards,
Martin

dejayM's picture

500 mls away

Gosh, how interesting.
I agree entirely - I like the fuzzy ones too, they often generate the MOST interesting opinions and the longest comment trail.
I'd stand corrected, humbled even, if you were implying that I was laying criticism regarding poor photos.
However, HOWEVER, there is a general uplift in the quality of postings lately - check for yourselves.
Your 'Offering of the Day' Martin is, in my opinion, exemplary (photowise that is!)I'd like to see more text-clues. I don't have any offerings but I'd like more agreements! Please?

I wonder how many 'got' mls for wet photography?

martinjohnbishop's picture

From Flora Europaea

I did give a brief diagnosis. Not sure what else I need to do?
Umbels terminal; bracts 0; leaves coarsely divided; fruit length (excluding spines) 4 mm; spines more or less straight with a hooked tip
Regards,
Martin

dejayM's picture

support

YOU don't need to do any more Martin. All your posts are fine. All the details, of course, can be gleaned from web pages but I think we should give good descriptive notes to support photos and to encourage new-comers.
See my Classic attempt here http://www.ispotnature.org/node/385878
Note the See Comments
amen!

marksteer's picture

I agree more descriptive

I agree more descriptive notes would help newcomers and also me! Mostly posting and looking Fungi where descriptions as well as photos are very important. I try to post as full descriptions as possible but I'm not perfect!

The more I know the more I realise I don't know

dejayM's picture

Notes

Thanks Mark (and others). Perhaps you could open a thread about experienced posters writing more descriptive notes alongside their usually excellent photos. I fear that this thread has outlived its more precise purpose.
ðerek

JoC's picture

Better than good enough.

Your description of Torilis arvenis, and cited above by dj has, I think! enough text details accompanying the photos for agreement. Of course since it's not in the British Isles section, it relies on we few (we happy few globalists) to add our comments.
Jo
p.s I checked FE too.

Jo

JoC's picture

Browse Observation

Thanks dj; I have not clicked this before. I usually go to a Habitat or scroll through the two rows of thumbnails at the top and pick one. 'Browse' is a better than the thumbnails. And I now see what you mean by flags.
A now for 'A flag for the unwary'......
Jo

Jo

dejayM's picture

coming

Origin 24 Dec. 2013
Those coming here should not overlook the opportunity to look >>here too<<
Later
Below this is/was a comment in Russian - a Spamful of five HotLinks.
I have marked it as inappropriate.

marksteer's picture

Me too - I didn't open links

Me too - I didn't open links but know enough to see this is spam from 'Russian ladies'!

The more I know the more I realise I don't know

dejayM's picture

Spams

Origin 9th Jan 2015
One should find it easy to trap users with names like 39farichwatchlar935, 754pivolswhistma272 and 869tiomahollsort1252 but you have to laugh at their stupidity. Yes? Maybe leave them until they wither...it's pretty harmless advertising - so far...though DON'T test it.
ð
PS. 27, so far, zapped. Thanks
I do feel sorry for those who have contributed to this Thread

Matt Smith's picture

spammers

Any chance we can stop updating this thread with revised numbers of spammers "zapped" - every time it happens I get a notification of a "change" in this thread and go and see if anything interesting has been added. It hasn't. Just report them to admin and leave it at that - thats what I do.

Tachinid Recording Scheme

www.tachinidae.org.uk

TRS Facebook Page
http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Tachinid-Recording-Scheme/376652392364707

dejayM's picture

Yes and no

Well Matt - I'm truly sorry.
You get notified EACH time a Spammer adds spam, each time Admin removes it (Core Edit) and each time I modify my comment; because they all get done in one go, more or less, you only get one flag and because we are diligent, you see only my comment. (I will never update the comment again - honest)
I don't think the spammers're finished here, but I have.
Good wishes

martinjohnbishop's picture

We need your help