Isn’t there an obligation on the part of those scheduling observations on another Satnogs station to then rate those observations? I have thousands of unvetted observations that could add to my stats, but not unless I do them.
Just curious.
Hey @K2PI,
No there isn’t any obligation to anyone to vet observations. However vetting is really useful for checking easily the status of a satellite and the status of a station.
Some notes:
- In station page, the success rate bar is showing good+bad vs failed observations, ignoring the unvetted ones. Indeed more vetted observations either good or bad would increase the success rate of the station.
- Vetting is now limited only to station owners and some individuals operators that have the right to vet observations. In order to increase people that vet and improve the vetting process, we plan to introduce multiple vetting (More than one person will be able to vet artifacts from one observation) and to expand vetting to all logged in users. This could introduce bots that are trained to vet observations and allowing people that want to contribute but don’t have a station to do so.
- Currently the stats we have for satellites, transmitters and stations in Network are very basic and poor. There are several ideas for making better and more useful stats, however there are other developer tasks higher in the priority list. Fortunately the dev team has now new members, so changes may come earlier than expected.
- If there is a need for vetting on a specific station or satellite, feel free to open a thread here in the forum and ask for it, or even better open an issue in the operations repository with the label
action:vetting.
3 Likes
Thanks Fredy, very useful to know. I will not worry about them and vet as I desire.
Regards.
1 Like