Jump to content
Whatbird Community


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Melierax

  1. I like Dusky for the first one as well. Hammond's just look generally stubby to me, with shorter bills and heads that look quite large and round. This bird looks relatively long tailed and lean to me. Pretty positive the chip chip is the end of a Bullock's Oriole song. You can hear an identical chatter before every call.

    • Like 2
  2. I tried to ask discretely in the Whatbirds young birders thread but it wouldn't pop to the top. 

    #1. Replies aren't being detected.

    #2. Notifications aren't working. 

    #3. Apparently posting is being affected. 

    EDIT: Can confirm, when you press post it gives you a "whatbird can't process this request" screen but it did post.

  3. Just as a general rule of thumb that I go by, I never add a new identification unless I have some additional information to provide. I figure if I can't provide more information, other people will and help out the OP with the ID. Maybe it's just me, but I see this forum as more of a place where people can learn identification, not just constantly receive IDs from supposed experts. An explanation is always more valuable than a blank "agree".

    • Like 1
  4. 3 hours ago, akandula said:

    I agree with a lot of the above, that is, to reduce the number of plain “agreeds.” Additionally, I wanted to add that nobody should be replying “agreed” if they don’t actually know if the ID is right or wrong. For example, if you’ve never heard of a Leach’s Storm-Petrel, don’t agree with the original ID just for “reputation points” or whatever else. Only agree with IDs that you actually think are correct. The problem with just agreeing with everything suggested is that, as mentioned above, more people would be far more hesitant to disagree with many people than just one person. 

    To emphasize my argument, I would disagree with what some people said above. It is stated earlier that some people are more uncomfortable if only one or two people confirm. However, in my viewpoint, all I want are “true” opinions. So, out of the 2500+ people on the forum, if only one or two people know the ID, let it be. I would not just want some “filler/fake agreeds” to meet the 3 confirmation goal.

    To add to this... A lot of the time after two people post, the OP thanks the identifiers and is clearly satisfied with the ID. I don't think there's any need after the fact to add an additional agreed.

    • Like 1
  5. 11 minutes ago, Connor Cochrane said:

    As someone who lives in California, a state with large counties, I've always wondered, in sites with more smaller counties, is it easier to find newer birds for the counties, like 1-10th county recs, since less birding is generally being done in the county, or harder, because there is less Habitat?

    VERY. I have 3 county firsts for my yard. I live in Twin Falls county, a very large county that is very underbirded, definitely no lack of habitat.

  6. 6 minutes ago, Bird Brain said:


    There are pros and cons to any system that is set up. I agree in principal with this suggestion, since we have had many threads brought back to the top when after a few (or several) days someone reads it and states simply "I agree". On the other hand we have had as many as five or six people agree on an ID and then have someone challenge the ID and after more discussion the consensus changes on the ID. As @Connor Cochrane stated above, "Only in a perfect world". If 3 or more people have agreed on an ID I don't add my 2 cents worth if I agree, but I will question it if I feel strongly enough that the ID might be wrong. That's just my take on it. I don't think a thread should be locked if 3 have agreed on it because we're all prone to mistakes.

    Yeah, I completely agree. I don't think threads should be locked either, I just think that as a general guide if there are already 3 agrees on something and you also agree, there's no need to put a 4th on there.

    • Like 1
  • Create New...