Relationship users and moderators

Alexander, I duplicated the message, because I thought that was ignored. I wrote a commentary on the two butterflies, one photo you move, the second - why it is not. Although it is still written, that everything is correct. Let's agree (in the future) as follows. You will not ignore me.If my definition is correct, move the photo to the right place, if not - you told me it right, in the face saying, but do not ignore. I think it would be better everything: me and you.
And the fact that the attack - is the best way of defense, it is undoubtedly yes. I am already familiar with this from their own experience.

Sergei, you misunderstand the processes taking place on site. And ask for the impossible: 1. duplicate message is desirable only when passed a considerable time, measured in days, weeks and months :). 2.Patience, moderators work to the extent possible, as well as on all the other sites, and from your determination to transfer part may take considerable time, one does not see someone not sure. And the definition goes into the story, and in this case, is appropriate to recall that the definition is. 3.I personally am not going to answer each of your post (I do not always happen on the site, I do not know the correct answer, I'm not interested in the issue, etc.) If I see the correct definition, I bear in determining if a mistake, I'm writing about it, too, if I'm not competent in this form or may be several solutions, I ignore, and I will do so, and further, it is my right to you :) this will have to be measured :).I do not like the quality of the photos that you post on mobiole, a lot of interesting and banal forms (which no one puts), but the quality !!!! and do not want to improve their skills, "and so shall eat."Exhibiting on the definition sometimes banal and simple types, and define complex here, it does not get mobiol where you define for a specific person, here you define for the site, which is viewed by thousands of people and they are perfect to watch the inaccuracy years.Please write the definition as sure it is correct (may be wrong all), not about looks. I treat you with respect :). Peter, please suffered two recent post on this species, a separate discussion thread.

After the words of Alexander will no longer spread the miserable picture quality. Well, I'm not a photographer.

Well begun ...People, well, how much is already possible to explain that all these insults on the Internet - a kindergarten? Dmitri, the wretched quality of your pictures illustrate the many species on this site, what do you still need proof that they need a site?Well, yes, it would be nice if you had a better shot, but such foty that you upload, it is still better than nothing, because many kinds of online ph-existent. None.In addition, I remind everyone that the situation when the last time on the site almost removed downloadable images, time associated with delay implementation of the mechanism of putting points shooting / fishing maps. When finish it - some foty removed (absolutely unremarkable, includinggeography), and some will go to the section "photo itself is not very interesting, a lot of the same angle in the best quality, but the photo left, because illustrates the geo point finds species. " Perhaps such foty be somehow separated from the core, but they are still needed.

Just neighing over the quality of your photos. Offended anyone thought.

Alexander, I would like to ask for clarification of certain points.
"but the quality !!!! and do not want to improve their skills," and so shall eat. '"
I do not understand what you need from me is impossible. Who says I do not want to improve their ability to take pictures? Very I want. But this is not done immediately.For the development of photography takes time, and it is desirable to do so under someone's guidance rather than stew in their own juice. I do not even many of the most basic concepts and rules of photography I do not know! And besides, I have a bad camera is suitable for macro photography, you do this to me I said.In addition, many has been criticized me that I use the flash. But excuse me, how to give it, I currently have no idea. Just a flash I get a photo, in which at least drawing butterflies somehow, but it is clear. When I shoot without a flash, it turns out that something is not imaginable.Photos obtained through chur so dark and vague, that it is difficult to understand what kind of butterfly they depict. Many people recommend shooting in daylight. But what it means in the "daylight"? If I try to take pictures during the day, it still turns very dark and blurry.Do I have to go out in the sun? But, forgive me, for me it is very difficult, because I live in a city apartment. Such are the cases. If you tell me what specific measures can be taken to improve the quality of the photos I will be very grateful."A lot of interesting and banal forms (which no one puts)"
And what are the specific types (of me laid out) you will find interesting, let me ask you. I believe that there is nothing interesting there. Moreover, I consider the area their uninteresting and utterly useless in entomological terms.All that is there to be studied, have already learned. I am, if you want to know all the powers attaching to quickly move away somewhere else. Still worse than this is unlikely to be.
Here and now I consider it appropriate to explain why so hurry up with the definition of their butterflies on molbiole. I just graduated from university this year.Recently I got a job on a specialty. November 5 go to work. So, up to this number of EVERYTHING that can be identified by the appearance of the genitals without cooking should be determined. I planned a very busy schedule, when going to work, time to do summer camp almost will not. So I'm in a hurry.BUT note I expose only those (as I believe) copies of which can be determined by appearance. Hopeless not exhibited. Scoop and moths of the bad groups, is determined only by the preparation of the genitals (Acronicta cuspis / tridens / psi, Heliothis viriplaca / adaucta, Hoplodrina sp., Amphipoea sp., Hydraecia sp., Mesapamea sp., Oligia sp., Mesoligia sp., Conistra vaccinii / ligula, Mniotype adusta / bathensis, Mythimna pallens / impura / straminea, Diarsia rubi / florida, Euxoa sp. from the scoop and many Eupithecia sp.of moths) in the winter, I sent to Moscow for the determination of Sviridov. I already agreed with him about it. But those who are definable in appearance, it is necessary to dismantle as much as possible as soon as possible to the beginning of November.
"I treat you with respect :)"
In light of recent events quite not sure :(.

People just Get to know some simple editing such as ACDSee Pro 6 (a program fee, but each key locks can always choose): bit with photos poshamanil and get completely fit for site quality even with dish soap :) Also not a photographer (more catch ).

Sergei Kotov, let's keep the discussion here, several different people did you remark about whining, I repeat do not want to. The more you do the definitions, the greater the error. But the percentage of errors you have fallen sharply, this is good.These two species are very widely vary in color and size, and even the presence of a white stroke, and can often be mistaken, I was cooking, I know :). What is the offense? behave correctly with respect to all participants. and you will get the same attitude. But everyone can make mistakes and wrong, from this no one is immune.But we should not build its own errors and uncertainty in the rank of bias moderators. Good luck in the definition.

Do not mistake only one who does nothing.

"Do not mistake only one who does nothing."
Gold words!

Nemo omnia potest scire

Some comments from the neighbors and photographs are cut, because I do not carry anything constructive, and the views of each other all the parties reviewed.

In recent years can be traced from some users who define butterflies on other sites: Startup photo to give someone else's definition of its own. In particular: to molbiole. Many authors of the site are as the same user molbiola determining where butterflies.Therefore, I have a request: necessarily need to write who and where identified butterfly. If this molbiol in many cases, the moderator has the ability to put the right name. And somehow wrong turns :)

Vasily, do not look for crime, where it is not. the authors of the photos do not bother specifying which determined because they are not who does not ask about it. there is no column "opredilit" there is a column "species name" here and write the name yuez malice dropping defined. it is necessary to ask Peter to upload photos when it was possible to indicate the author's definition.but there are certain a reverse process we spread on the other. sites without opredilit too :)))

And one alone is not looking. Just need to know the authors, it is necessary to specify the accurate name defined. It is difficult to write the author's name in the comments? To moder noticed and suffered? And no crime :)

Basil, are you sure that the authors read "Messages"? I do not.
Peter, there is a need to introduce the column "determined" only as the issue will be resolved with the author, if he is not registered on the site, so be black :)))

Alexander, I am also not sure yet, "what if?" :)
In fact, a serious issue, and I support the proposal of Alexander.
You can make two fields: one (with autosubstitution) to enter the authors, who are on site, and the other to manually enter the initials of people that are not in the list of authors.And with an unfilled at-least one of them to make it impossible to download a photo.
So it is necessary in my view to make the required filling of "technical" fields: date of shooting and geography. It is generally paramount in any case !!!
It's all a dream, of course, but what to do: there is a need in my all to do it :)