|User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote.|
|I’d Call It That||3.0||5.42||1||(jason)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
Remember that we don’t have any control over Google. They usually refresh their index of our site very regularly, but it’ll probably take a day or two at least, and even then I suspect the image search takes even longer to update.
Sorry, I thought you were talking about the search bar at the top of our page! There are tricky questions about which images and observations to match when searching for a name like “Sistotrema efibulatum”: Include synonyms? Include ones with no confidence? Match rejected names? We can even match based on the name simply being mentioned in the notes! I think we do, actually. I think we erred on the side of matching too many things, but we could easily be missing some cases which you would expect it to match. If you stumble across any such cases, I would be very grateful to hear of them.
today I uploaded a pic of Sistotrema efibulatum and was googling for it. With no result. Neither with the name alone nor with the name in combination with M.O. …
I’m afraid I haven’t had time to actually use my own website for some time… If you wouldn’t mind giving me an example of a search that is missing images, that would be very helpful. Thanks!
Many photos from M.O. does also not show up when you search for mushroom pics via epitheton. Maybe this could also be improved?
and I’m an administrator! I think it wanted to interpret “auctum” as “auct. Xxx”. I’ll have to check into this someday. But now the name’s created, it should be okay. Sorry for the trouble.
It should read PROSTHECIUM AUCTUM of course and not sp. auctum … don’t know how to fix it.
Created: 2011-12-24 17:59:01 EST (-0500)
Last modified: 2011-12-25 14:15:19 EST (-0500)
Viewed: 55 times, last viewed: 2017-06-10 07:27:47 EDT (-0400)