Interactions missing

This observation on the old site had over 200 interactions to insects, invertebrates and other organims visiting this plant.

This is what it looks like on the new site:

Where are the interactions???

This is one of four observations of the Chili, which has over 500 interactions in total for the plant.

iSpot again says 0 observations interacting with this species:

When are the corruptions to the data going to be fixed???

In theory lots of the missing interactions should be in the update tomorrow (3/8/2017)

1 Like

Cool. Looking forward to it!!

Can never find my way back to previous comments Tony, but at least I can find a link to you.
Will you please take a look at this and see what you can do to, at least, return the ID to a Lichen rather than a fungus.

Then I think dejay will appreciate the link mentioned in Vynbos’s comment: “The other species can be found here:”
Now (2017) we get:

So then I tried finding another link from my records
Looks as if the flies win again

My comment at the time: [NB this is my THIRD attempt at posting, it keeps crashing] Can’t date this -
Looks as if we’ve always had problems.

SHOULD I HOLD MY BREATH will these go away tomorrow?

  1. we dont have the clout to change the ID.

2.&3. links are still broken.

1 Like

No but I thought you might outbid by agreeing with the Lecanoromycetes so this would not be lost - at the moment it’s in limbo and it would be a pity to delete and start again.


It’s all very well to say that - but what is the value of a observation when it’s never linked because of the way the agreements are weighted on iSpot? :persevere:
Follow up: DON’T PANIC - but try following the original link above.
I haven’t deleted it - but looks as if iSpot has made it more inaccessible.
I was able to find it by searching for “lichen with black discs stofbergsfontein”

You’ll find it under Species dictionary taxonomy: Dermateaceae

Surely all that is needed is that someone (not a lesser mortal like myself) needs to go to the observation and agree to the identification Lecanoromycetes agreeng that it’s a Lichen which is what you call them all the time.

Att dejayM (hope this finds you)

The way iSpot works is that you have to get support for your ID.

it is unethical to throw away a lot of other user’s ideas and work by deleting an observation just so that your ID is accepted! Be patient.

(very patient until CHANGES is fixed).

If you cannot wait: email contact (iSpot ([email protected])) and request that the curator asks the expert to change their ID/agreement in the meantime.

It has
But there’s more to it than than than a single agreement - a question of icon scores. To be honest, if you read the Comments, NO-one should agree above Lichen level and no-one should ever agree to a flawed panel (no links to externals) UNLESS the name is not in the dictionary, even then when Likely occurs in that Panel, it is often VERY hard to shift…
In these days when New Comments are not notified, posts like this get lost in time and space - the final frontie…
Tony is right [quote=“Tony_Rebelo, post:7, topic:308”]
you must never delete but forming a new post with reference to the Old is OK
And be

It’s all rather a SILLY system - and to mention ethics MAKES ME SEE RED.
“just so that your ID is accepted”
Do you really believe that this is not a Lichen Tony
Guess it’s time to sign out.

The ID is not the issue. The ID is there. The system is there. But so are lots of other peoples’s contributions: trashing all their work to get an ID is not on!

Red Goats (Interacting)

Are these the Goats that Tony has? “Gets up my Goat” A peculiar breed

Speaking of Red, it’s time I had more support here - already consigned to History, lost in a dustbin of full of flies and moths