Story Sent Back due to AI?

[StillStunned]

Not true.

This confusion arises because people don't seem to understand the difference between dialogue and a quotation. UK and US English are the same when it comes to dialogue - the punctuation sits within the punctuation marks. "Like this?" she asked. "Like that," he replied.

When a piece of dialogue is quoted by someone else, the second speaker's punctuation goes outside the quotation marks.

For example: Did Churchill write, "We shall fight them on the beaches, we shall fight them in the streets, we shall never surrender!"? Note the !"? - this came up a couple of days ago, and the rules of grammar haven't changed.

The punctuation stays with the sentence it is punctuating.

Bringing 25+ years of experience as a professional editor (UK English) to bear to agree with EB here.

Even so, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, it's a bit petty to reject a story on that ground, considering some of the atrocious quality of spelling and punctuation that gets through.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Bringing 25+ years of experience as a professional editor (UK English) to bear to agree with EB here.

Even so, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, it's a bit petty to reject a story on that ground, considering some of the atrocious quality of spelling and punctuation that gets through.

I don't think it's petty to bounce back something that has blatantly incorrect punctuation, which is the case being cited here. STrent's claim that their punctuation is correct in the UK is just as wrong as Millie's incorrect assertion as to the differences between the UK and the US.

In this instance the site provided samples of the corrections needed, which usually doesn't happen. STrent needs to suck this one up and submit something that's punctuated correctly. That's not in fact hard to do.

I do take your point as to the number of shockers that get through - although, how old are those stories you're referring to? My impression over the years is that the basic technical quality has improved - probably because bot readers ARE picking up poorly written text. Like in this instance.

 

[STrent]

Not true.

This confusion arises because people don't seem to understand the difference between dialogue and a quotation. UK and US English are the same when it comes to dialogue - the punctuation sits within the punctuation marks. "Like this?" she asked. "Like that," he replied.

When a piece of dialogue is quoted by someone else, the second speaker's punctuation goes outside the quotation marks.

For example: Did Churchill write, "We shall fight them on the beaches, we shall fight them in the streets, we shall never surrender!"? Note the !"? - this came up a couple of days ago, and the rules of grammar haven't changed.

The punctuation stays with the sentence it is punctuating.

With respect, that is true up to a point, but different dialogue punctuation (as per my example) has always existed and yes, there are versions (older versions I grant you) of books published with the style I have used.

All moot as, after an hour of find/change all this morning, I now have ten chapters that have been fully checked for AI, punctuated to within an inch of their lives, and now resubmitted for publishing. I have done a consistent change across all of them.

Now I have to wait likely another week to see what happens.

 

[STrent]

I don't think it's petty to bounce back something that has blatantly incorrect punctuation, which is the case being cited here. STrent's claim that their punctuation is correct in the UK is just as wrong as Millie's incorrect assertion as to the differences between the UK and the US.

In this instance the site provided samples of the corrections needed, which usually doesn't happen. STrent needs to suck this one up and submit something that's punctuated correctly. That's not in fact hard to do.

I do take your point as to the number of shockers that get through - although, how old are those stories you're referring to? My impression over the years is that the basic technical quality has improved - probably because bot readers ARE picking up poorly written text. Like in this instance.

Sorry, I need to strongly disagree with this.

We are talking about different styles and publishing requirements and it’s been my literal lived experience, to the extent that I have no less than five fictional books which have been adjusted to that style and published in the UK, as recently as five months ago.

Either way - I have “sucked it up” as above and just done a find all/change all this morning across everything I’ve written and tried t publish here.

I can’t do anymore than that, right?

It is difficult to change habits and styles of a lifetime, and no, my impression of a lot of the more recent published stories on Literotica is that ones with good grammar, sentence structure are rare, only the serious writers getting that right and there are loads which are both wildly inconsistent in their formatting and poor in their grammar published of late.

It would not be fair to single anyone out for criticism but I urge you to go and look at recent works and see for yourself.

 

[ElectricBlue]

With respect, that is true up to a point, but different dialogue punctuation (as per my example) has always existed and yes, there are versions (older versions I grant you) of books published with the style I have used.

Are you sure? I've been reading fiction for close on six decades, and I've never seen dialogue punctuated that way - I'm in Australia, so we get books both from UK and US publishers, and the only difference I've ever seen is ' vs "

I also read a ton of history and that's when you see the Winston Churchill example, where a writer is citing someone else's dialogue, or something they've written. People often think there's a difference between the US and UK dialogue conventions, but they're usually getting caught out by a quotation, which is something different.

 

[mildlyaroused]

@STrent is using a style of dialogue which is not wrong, but certainly uncommon in the modern era. As far as I know, American English has always put punctuation inside quotation marks. UK English tends to these days in mainstream publishing, but there is precedent in the past to do it Trent's way, with punctuation outside the quotes. I don't know how common it ever was, but I've seen it before.

That said, it'll never not surprise me when stories are rejected for supposed grammar, style, punctuation, etc. I've seen so many stories with horrendous punctuation in relation to dialogue that got through. I mean, how often do you see things like this?

"Okay" she said.

"Okay." she said.

"Okay," She said.

"Okay." She said.

None of these are correct, but I see them all the time. They're actually less correct that what Trent wrote. And as for style, there has never been consistent style across Literotica. Think of all the disparities: UK vs US English, em dash vs hyphen, etc, etc. Mainstream publishes can and will enforce conformity. Lit? Not so much.

 

[STrent]

Are you sure? I've been reading fiction for close on six decades, and I've never seen dialogue punctuated that way - I'm in Australia, so we get books both from UK and US publishers, and the only difference I've ever seen is ' vs "

I also read a ton of history and that's when you see the Winston Churchill example, where a writer is citing someone else's dialogue, or something they've written. People often think there's a difference between the US and UK dialogue conventions, but they're usually getting caught out by a quotation, which is something different.

Yes, I am sure. I wouldn’t be saying so if I wasn’t!

I live in the UK and it is - again - my lived experience.

Note I am not saying that the punctuation you are providing is wrong. It’s obviously not. It’s the global position for punctuation for dialogue.

However, in the UK, we have had this other convention for centuries at this point and both have been taught in the education system previously (no idea if that is still true today).

The thing that bothers me most about it is that even if you disagree with the style I am using, it is at least consistent.

@STrent is using a style of dialogue which is not wrong, but certainly uncommon in the modern era. As far as I know, American English has always put punctuation inside quotation marks. UK English tends to these days in mainstream publishing, but there is precedent in the past to do it Trent's way, with punctuation outside the quotes. I don't know how common it ever was, but I've seen it before.

That said, it'll never not surprise me when stories are rejected for supposed grammar, style, punctuation, etc. I've seen so many stories with horrendous punctuation in relation to dialogue that got through. I mean, how often do you see things like this?

"Okay" she said.

"Okay." she said.

"Okay," She said.

"Okay." She said.

None of these are correct, but I see them all the time. They're actually less correct that what Trent wrote. And as for style, there has never been consistent style across Literotica. Think of all the disparities: UK vs US English, em dash vs hyphen, etc, etc. Mainstream publishes can and will enforce conformity. Lit? Not so much.

This.

 

[ElectricBlue]

It is difficult to change habits and styles of a lifetime, and no, my impression of a lot of the more recent published stories on Literotica is that ones with good grammar, sentence structure are rare, only the serious writers getting that right and there are loads which are both wildly inconsistent in their formatting and poor in their grammar published of late.

It would not be fair to single anyone out for criticism but I urge you to go and look at recent works and see for yourself.

You're not wrong there, but that's not the point. The point is, correct punctuation matters, and it's our job as authors to do the very best we can to get it right, and aspire to be better writers, ourselves. Why worry about the next guy? That's their problem, not yours.

By saying, "But just look at the amount of junk out there, how did that get through?" is comparing yourself to the lowest common denominator, but that's a low standard, and is of no help to you. Presumably you came to the AH to get some advice, how do I get my story published?

The best advice any of us old timers here can give is, don't worry about that guy's piss poor writing over there, okay, they were lucky, they got some poor writing over the line, but so what? If your issue has been pointed out to you, put the energy into fixing it, and your content will no longer be down there with mediocrity, it will be better than that.

Aiming higher makes you a better writer, surely? Why would you benchmark yourself against the ordinary?

 

[STrent]

You're not wrong there, but that's not the point. The point is, correct punctuation matters, and it's our job as authors to do the very best we can to get it right, and aspire to be better writers, ourselves. Why worry about the next guy? That's their problem, not yours.

By saying, "But just look at the amount of junk out there, how did that get through?" is comparing yourself to the lowest common denominator, but that's a low standard, and is of no help to you. Presumably you came to the AH to get some advice, how do I get my story published?

The best advice any of us old timers here can give is, don't worry about that guy's piss poor writing over there, okay, they were lucky, they got some poor writing over the line, but so what? If your issue has been pointed out to you, put the energy into fixing it, and your content will no longer be down there with mediocrity, it will be better than that.

Aiming higher makes you a better writer, surely? Why would you benchmark yourself against the ordinary?

Counterpoint: it can become utterly demoralising to see something get through that is just not polished at all, when you’ve personally invested so much time into your own work to try and get through.

Of course I want to aim high, but my perception is that the system isn’t working on a few specific points.

I do absolutely agree we should aim high for standards.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

I do take your point as to the number of shockers that get through - although, how old are those stories you're referring to? My impression over the years is that the basic technical quality has improved - probably because bot readers ARE picking up poorly written text. Like in this instance.

My impression is the exact opposite, to be honest. I know of at least two different stories that were posted over the last week, but have now been deleted by the authors over being bashed in the comments for how badly they were written. This is one that wasn't taken down: https://www.literotica.com/s/she-blamed-it-on-my-ptsd

Honestly, if I saw stories like these get through after one of mine had been rejected for presumably using AI... I wouldn't know what to say.

 

[STrent]

My impression is the exact opposite, to be honest. I know of at least two different stories that were posted over the last week, but have now been deleted by the authors over being bashed in the comments for how badly they were written. This is one that wasn't taken down: https://www.literotica.com/s/she-blamed-it-on-my-ptsd

Honestly, if I saw stories like these get through after one of mine had been rejected for presumably using AI... I wouldn't know what to say.

So I wouldn’t put that story into the category I was thinking of. I do note that particular story has the dialogue in the format requested.

The story’s not bad, but like all of us, probably needs an extra eye and some editing.

I had an offer from a forum member to do some reading of my stories and he’s done a great job questioning the drafts.

I’ve learned a lot from that.

Yes, it has been demoralising. I have however done edits on nine chapters this morning. All done the same, all the same dialogue punctuation, all checked for AI and adjusted to suit wherever there was an issue.

Fingers crossed. See you in a week!

 

[mildlyaroused]

Do people know what the common denominator is for AI detection/rejection? That is, what are the common aspects or stylistic areas of stories that get flagged?

I have never had anything flagged. That includes various academic submissions which were screened with some pretty serious & strict tools.

 

[STrent]

Do people know what the common denominator is for AI detection/rejection? That is, what are the common aspects or stylistic areas of stories that get flagged?

So the one thing which I keep seeing when I puts my stuff through https://contentdetector.ai/ is that sentences starting with He/She don’t seem to be liked.

But the percentage for AI is always lower than 30%, and it highlights sentences it thinks may be AI in red.

But this particular line of investigation seems at odds with the sheer number of stories I have observed where there are sentences starting He/She throughout.

I have never had anything flagged. That includes various academic submissions which were screened with some pretty serious & strict tools.

It’s only Literotica where I have experienced this - I too do academic submissions and never had as much of a sniff of AI.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Counterpoint: it can become utterly demoralising to see something get through that is just not polished at all, when you’ve personally invested so much time into your own work to try and get through.

Of course I want to aim high, but my perception is that the system isn’t working on a few specific points.

I do absolutely agree we should aim high for standards.

I've always taken the view, worry about the things you can control, that benefit you. Sure, seeing the published junk is disheartening, but when you get yours up and over the line, that's what matters, surely? The other guy's junk is the other guy's problem, and certainly not your benchmark.

 

[STrent]

I've always taken the view, worry about the things you can control, that benefit you. Sure, seeing the published junk is disheartening, but when you get yours up and over the line, that's what matters, surely? The other guy's junk is the other guy's problem, and certainly not your benchmark.

Well, all fingers truly crossed!

 

[nice90sguy]

Well, all fingers truly crossed!

Impressed that you can still type that post

 

[STrent]

Impressed that you can still type that post

Yeah, me too.

 

[StillStunned]

Impressed that you can still type that post

They must be using AI!

(Sorry, @STrent, I just couldn't resist. Try to laugh through the pain.)

 

[SamBomb]

I just tried an experiment in the AI detector I've been using. I went to chatGTP and asked it to write a paragraph. Put it in the dector and it said 38% chance it was AI. I then rewrote it all, removing sentences, rewriting all of it. It jumped up to 50%.

I guess I write more like AI than chatGPT does.

 

[RedFireBrand]

Spellcheck and my editor only, thats it. Still got rejected. The system is broken. 68 chapters no issue but suddenly now its 'oops all AI' BS

 

[trevrepa]

The second chapter of my story I'm writing was just rejected by AI. I re-edited and rewrote a significant portion of it. The good news is, the story is now better after the rewrite. The bad news is, I have no idea if the changes I made have made it more likely to pass AI detection. Before submitting it, I ran it through 10 different AI detectors, which gave me a range from 1.3% AI to 89.7% AI, and everywhere in between. The two detectors that were most critical of my work were Sapling and Copyleaks. I suspect one of these two is what is being used based off of my sample so far, since those are the only two detectors it didn't "pass". I resubmitted my work, so we will see. If it doesn't pass, I suppose I'll rewrite it to pass Copyleaks and try again. Maybe this process will at least help identify by what method they are rejecting our stories.

 

[MillieDynamite]

For shits and giggles, I copied and pasted text from Camil into Spaling. It passed with flying colors, yet flagged a long section with red, meaning AI/AI/AI, but didn't fail it as AI. Confusing.

 

[cadeauxxx]

The second chapter of my story I'm writing was just rejected by AI. I re-edited and rewrote a significant portion of it. The good news is, the story is now better after the rewrite. The bad news is, I have no idea if the changes I made have made it more likely to pass AI detection. Before submitting it, I ran it through 10 different AI detectors, which gave me a range from 1.3% AI to 89.7% AI, and everywhere in between. The two detectors that were most critical of my work were Sapling and Copyleaks. I suspect one of these two is what is being used based off of my sample so far, since those are the only two detectors it didn't "pass". I resubmitted my work, so we will see. If it doesn't pass, I suppose I'll rewrite it to pass Copyleaks and try again. Maybe this process will at least help identify by what method they are rejecting our stories.

It's a coin toss if it will go in. The detection tools are proven to be faulty junk. Since AI is trained by whatever information someone feeds into it, the detectors are always going to be inconsistent.

I would advise you to put a note in the submission that you didn't use AI. I had to edit one story multiple times and the same thing as you, I was able to fix several things in a rewrite and improved it. It eventually went up after 3 tries.

I was hoping by now there would be some improvement here with the false flagging of AI, but looks like more and more people are having the same problems as the months roll by.

For shits and giggles, I copied and pasted text from Camil into Spaling. It passed with flying colors, yet flagged a long section with red, meaning AI/AI/AI, but didn't fail it as AI. Confusing.

View attachment 2322178

This is just further proof how inconsistent these programs are. I remember someone on this forum a few months ago put US historical government documents into an AI detection test, and it came out over 70% AI detected on the writing of James Madison. It also proves that the AI itself has to be trained by whatever information is fed to it.

I see nothing wrong with your writing at all, and I would just leave it as is. It's your work and therefore, your choice as the creator if you want to change it. If you're happy with it, that's all that matters.

 

[RedFireBrand]

I would advise you to put a note in the submission that you didn't use AI. I had to edit one story multiple times and the same thing as you, I was able to fix several things in a rewrite and improved it. It eventually went up after 3 tries.

Ive said this every time and she ignores it. I have submitted several times doing less editing, nothing. Either she ignores the note or something else

 

[MillieDynamite]

She does monitor the forum, so might not be the solutions to insult her if you want to get the story through.

Ive said this every time and she ignores it. I have submitted several times doing less editing, nothing. Either she ignores the note or is an idiot