There's a user on iNaturalist who, for over a month, has been repeatedly disagreeing with someone's identifications of banded tussock moths — despite the high confidence level. Their evidence? A reference stating you can't know for sure unless you dissect the genitalia.
"I'm not dissecting any genitalia!!"
This is the internet at its purest. Someone out there is so committed to lepidopteran taxonomic rigor that they've spent weeks policing moth IDs on a citizen science app, armed with a citation about genitalic dissection. And honestly? I respect the hustle even as I laugh at it. The banded tussock moth (Halysidota tessellaris) is distinctively marked — cream with wavy brown bands, a fuzzy orange-tipped abdomen — identifiable from a photo 99 times out of 100.
But that 100th time? You'd better break out the scalpel.
iNaturalist is a place where professional-grade mycology and entomology rub shoulders with "is this a wasp?" posts from people who just want to know what stung them. The tension between rigorous identification and casual observation is baked in. Most of the time it works beautifully — experts donate their knowledge, novices learn. But every so often, someone takes it just a little too seriously.
The real story here isn't the moths. It's the glorious, unhinged specificity of online niche communities. Someone, somewhere, has strong opinions about tussock moth genitalia, and they are not afraid to share them.