|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||11.23||2||(Noah,myxomop)|
|As If!||-3.0||7.91||2||(Enrico Carini,Byrain)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
We’ve heard all these arguments before. We’re just spinning our wheels making the ruts deeper.
this allows posters much freedom, but why lower the bar, instead of raising it?
contrast a data-free post (no specimen/no photo) with the amazingly detailed posts by say someone like Claude, who not only has macro but beautiful micro-photos, too.
no comparison. one has great value, the other is worthless.
if we want to use MO as a reliable database for sightings and distributions, then a photo is the bare minimum that we need.
it doesn’t matter how good the IDer … anyone can make an error. without a photo, it is just a rumor, and in fact, in some cases, an insult. why not just take that small step further to show what you have? why bother to just publish a species list? that’s no better than all of the many many past lists from here there and everywhere with absolutely no specimen or photo back-up. why not learn from our prior mistakes, and do it right going forward?
arrogance and an inflated sense of superiority cannot replace real data.
as to Noah’s fear that someone will “steal” his images … gosh this is sharing forum. if you don’t like sharing, go elsewhere.
besides, Noah always made a point of putting up only his lesser photos here anyway, or so he told me.
methinks Facebook is the right forum for those who just like to brag.
Although I am sure Noah knows this species (species complex?)I would prefer he post one photo of a species before posting imageless posts of that species. In this case there are two posts without photos. From my viewpoint I would like to see what Noah is calling I. fuscodisca from Ca. so I can compare it to what I am calling that species in Ohio. From a beginners standpoint, there is no learning to be had from imageless posts except to know that someone has reported a species from certain location. I am aware that the database from competent observers can be useful without a photo. But I think all preserved collections should have photos or drawings. Sharing one of these on MO would benefit more folks and would harm no one. The photo does not have to be the best one taken. Just a record shot would do.
no image, no debate, eh?