I agree that most spiders can't be identified (to species) from most photographs, and I often re-iterate that on the various forums where spiders are posted for 'identification'.
However, I disagree that id from photographs is a worthless pursuit, as, if nothing else, its an opportunity to engage the public and encourage some interest in spiders. A surprising number of the photographs that are posted are identifiable, most to family, some to genera, and a surprising amount to species.
I also think a photograph, whilst it may not provide certainty, can give a good indication of whether something is worth further investigation ~ in this case I don't think I was wrong to push it on for clarification. It's araniella. Fine. That is why I suggested it get posted here, for confirmation *or* rejection. So I'll continue to suggest that identifications that are outside my experience, but possibly of some significance, are referred here. I'll also continue to promote the SRS as a source of information for distribution, phrenology etc.
On balance, I hope on our interactions, I'm still in credit, though I do need to get my next chunk of microscopically confirmed records to you.. I had an out of season adult male metellina mengei yesterday, and a zilla diodia on rhododendron the day before.