{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/inaturalist/inaturalist/issues/819","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/inaturalist/inaturalist/issues/819/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/inaturalist/inaturalist/issues/819/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/inaturalist/inaturalist/issues/819/events","html_url":"https://github.com/inaturalist/inaturalist/issues/819","id":126981429,"number":819,"title":"One approach for tying up Project Stats loose ends for the Centennial BioBlitzes/Critter Calendar","user":{"login":"loarie","id":598026,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/598026?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie","html_url":"https://github.com/loarie","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/loarie/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/inaturalist/inaturalist/labels/improvements","name":"improvements","color":"84b6eb"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2016-01-15T23:46:11Z","updated_at":"2016-01-15T23:46:11Z","closed_at":null,"body":"We decided to run things like the Centennial BioBlitzes and the Critter Calendar as Projects (rather than just using the Search filters) mainly because of the benefits of the links from observations to projects that the project observation infrastructure provides (even though this incurs the cost of dealing with the aggregator and some of the other pain in ass things I'm about to mention).\r\n\r\nBut for both of these Use Cases, we currently still have to straddle both pieces of infrastructure (for example, the counts on the project header reflect the search filters, but the counts on membership or in the obs search with a project param reflect the project observations) which make the stats very ambiguous.\r\n\r\nThis issue lays out 5 things (probably will need to be spun off as separate issues) to run the Centennial BioBlitzes and the Critter Calendar stats unambiguously off counting the project observations.\r\n\r\n## Add project rule: must be observed within d1/d2\r\n\r\nCurrently, both the  Centennial BioBlitzes and the Critter Calendar are Projects of type BioBlitz so that there can be temporal (d1/d2) bounds on them. But this automatically gives me the Search filters header which results in the count discrepancies mentioned above. If we added temporal bounds as a project rule then Projects of type Normal could accomodate these use cases.\r\n\r\n## Consider ways to implement a  'project observation booter'\r\n\r\nThis observation http://www.inaturalist.org/observations/2563320 was ID'd as a cormorant and thus aggregated into the Cormorant Week Project. The ID was subsequently corrected making it no longer suitable (its  heron, not a cormorant). There's no easy way to find these unsuitable obs. Is it expensive to have the aggregator revisit obs who's ID's have changed? If not, could this obs be located through some sort of 'Not-suitable' filter?\r\n\r\n## Revive not_in_project\r\n\r\nWe now have broken 'Find Suitable Observations' links on projects since this param isn't working with the new obs search. This feature was super useful for making sense of what is/isn't in a project so I'd love to see it revived.\r\n\r\n## Add rule: 'must be verifiable'\r\n\r\nFor the same reason I pushed for this filter in the new Obs Search (its a simple way to get subset of obs broadly of 'value' to a community that are also harder to 'cheat' with), I'd like to apply this constraint to both the critter calendar and the centennial bioblitzes, but will require a rule.\r\n\r\n## Address leaves/species or lower discrepancy\r\n\r\nCurrently Obs Search counts by leaves and projects count by species-or-finer. Options are:\r\n1) have obs search count by species-or-finer\r\n2) have projects count by leaves\r\n3) have projects be configurable (count by leaves or species-or-finer)\r\n4) have obs search be configurable (count by leaves or species-or-finer)\r\n5) have both projects and obs search be configurable (count by leaves or species-or-finer)\r\n\r\n-I'm a big fan of leaves, so I don't think 1 is a good idea. Though I do recognize that its not ideal that in Obs Search tab count is in leaves but observer species counts from the Observers Tab are species only.\r\n-I'd be fine with 2 personally, but the point of projects is to accomodate admin's own agendas, so not sure whether this would be met with resistance.\r\n-3 seems like it might be the best idea, it could be leaves by default for consistency with obs search, but if a project wanted to do their own thing they could select species-or-finer\r\n-4 and 5 would work against the goal of having a shared narrative across the site emerging from the Obs Search if people were talking about different stats. So I don't think these are good ideas.\r\n\r\nSo I'd vote for 2 or 3. 3 being less controversial.\r\n\r\nThoughts?\r\n\r\n\r\n"}}