It’s very frustrating! I have just put this observation on https://www.ispotnature.org/communities/uk-and-ireland/view/observation/824805/
using the drop-down taxonomy menu. There is no button for any agreements or links to other of the same observations.
I did this with 3 different bat spectrograms over the weekend and tried various ways of inputting the information and had the same problem. I have unpublished these.
What can be done?
Edited 1,30pm -An iSpotter has said the ‘agreement’ button is visible but this is not the case for me.
Yes, it’s designed to stop people adding agreements to their own identification. The Bat didn’t link to Other Observations because you don’t have a sufficient reputation (in mammals) to invoke the Likely Banner. I’m sure someone who knows Bats and has two or more mammal icons will agree thereby invoking the banner and linking your ob to the others.
Thanks for all the detail and time, HB! Following your explanation, I looked for something on reputation and found ‘Reputation on iSpot’, hidden away under Community articles. I don’t thinks it’s made clear enough how it all works, unlike what you’ve written Ta, again!
We like to be charitable and call such things “quirks”…
There has been discussion in the past about issuing a “welcome” pack for new users - with a sort of “faq” section. I don’t know if it is still under consideration.
Part of the problem is that some new users pitch in without doing much if any researching. I know I did, a good few years back. It’s easy then to get frustrated and give up. Others may read the guidance, make a good start, then hit one of the “quirks”, and also become dispirited. It’s amazing that well-established users still fall foul of invalid ID panels, for instance. But it’s understandable - even if you do diligently pick from a drop-down, that’s no guarantee of success.
As the Romans didn’t say: illegitimi non carborundum (don’t let the [gremlins] grind you down).
More (of the same)
You are not allowed to agree to your own ID of course.
You will not invoke the Likely Banner until your second Icon in the Group - sometimes it take a long time to get the second icon.
The way iSpot awards Icons is not fully understood by anyone I have asked. It is certainly a complex process using ‘the iSpot Algorithm’ - it makes mistakes.
You can see how it MIGHT work by looking at a few other people’s Profile, The score for each Group is visible (ONLY if you are logged in) and the Algorithm uses that score-complex to award an Icon.
Generally the bias is towards agreements received.
The Help-explanation here Reputation on iSpot | Article | UK and Ireland | iSpot Nature is not very thorough. To include the statement “it’s a bit experimental.” is not very reassuring, considering it has been running for 12 years.
Thanks for the extra detail, Derek. Maybe part of taking a long time to get a second icon is that the observations disappear from the carousel, especially when there are a lot being added and then get missed unless filters are used. Consequently, this adds to the ‘no agreement’ issue that you’ve highlighted previously…
I put the 3 spectrograms from the Devon bats back on (my original post here refers). I included as much inf as I had but no agreements so far.
This raises an interesting issue, what if there were an ai on the site that listened to the bat calls and agreed or otherwise. What level of reputation would the ai have. This is not a theoretical question as ai is one of the items that may be added for certain groups of organisms.