photo posted by the Stricklands is not E. flava. E. militaris males do have *some* white under the eyes...long, straggly white hairs directly over the chelicerae, and in some cases, small, thin white patches at the outside edges of the face. E. flava, by contrast, has a very distinct, solid, dense, bright white line that runs the entire width of the face. (As in the photo you provided.)

Side note: Given that the area right over the chelicerae and palps is highly reflective, some flash photos of E. militaris come out looking like there is a solid, very thin white line running the entire width of the face, even though there is not. It's just a trick of the light hitting the few straggly white hairs that are there, combined with the glare of the flash. I've had to re-adjust the angle of the lighting on a few photos of E. militaris I have taken for that very reason. As soon as I saw the image on my camera screen, I realized it did not accurately portray what I was seeing in person, and might have ended up being confusing when the photo was posted for ID confirmation. I became aware of the need to do that a couple of years ago, after looking at hundreds of adult male images of these 2 species, and reading the comments.

Having said all of this, I am, of course, basing my opinion on the comments experts have made regarding the distinguishing characteristics of these species, and assuming they are correct. Personally, I do not have a DNA lab in my basement. :)

But, yeah, at the very least this one should be removed from E. flava and bumped back to the Eris genus page. I suspect it is E. militaris (I'll let someone else make that call) but it is definitely not E. flava.

I'm shocked :-) Thanks for the input and I think you're right that this one should probably be put back at genus