Resubmitted My Story After It Was Sent Back as AI Work — Seeking Clarity & Support

[ElectricBlue]

Yeah, the limbo is probably a more apt comparison.

A crack on the footpath, at times.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

The short answer is no-one but Laurel knows how many stories she rejects as possible AI, and absolutely no-one here knows how many are falsely flagged.

I agree, and that's why we resort to some reasonable estimates. Maybe they are completely wrong, I don't know. But it strikes me as funny the insistence on hard evidence when so many people, you among them, claim that Laurel does this, Laurel does that, Laurel is the only one who works with submissions, she uses an algorithm, she also skims through text with her super-abilities and detects anomalies, etc.
You say things like that every freaking day, EB. And none of you has a shred of evidence of that. SkyBubble's estimate looks tame in comparison.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I agree, and that's why we resort to some reasonable estimates. Maybe they are completely wrong, I don't know. But it strikes me as funny the insistence on hard evidence when so many people, you among them, claim that Laurel does this, Laurel does that, Laurel is the only one who works with submissions, she uses an algorithm, she also skims through text with her super-abilities and detects anomalies, etc.
You say things like that every freaking day, EB. And none of you has a shred of evidence of that. SkyBubble's estimate looks tame in comparison.

Eleven years is a long time to pick up clues, mic drops here and there, posts posted, comments made, emails sent and received. But of course you dismiss that, because I'm an apologist for the site. Shrug.

 

[Voboy]

Eleven years is a long time to pick up clues, mic drops here and there, posts posted, comments made, emails sent and received. But of course you dismiss that, because I'm an apologist for the site. Shrug.

In addition, the non-apologists seem to conveniently forget that the standard for mitigating false positives (resubmission with an Authors' Note) so often gets the job done and is, frankly, not much of an imposition.

I still say this isn't a major problem as far as the overall health of the story side of the site is concerned. Maybe it'll become a problem one day, but today is not that day.

 

[Voboy]

As I noted earlier, somewhere around 730 stories a year or so falsely flagged as AI. You may not consider that a problem, but to others, it definitely looks like one.

1-2% is not an insubstantial number, but 98% successful publication tells me that most people have no trouble getting published. I don't think that's all that controversial of a statement, using your own numbers (as spurious or non-spurious as they might be).

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

The forums are a small microcosm of Lit authors, but how many posts do we see a week? Maybe a dozen or so? How many stories go up without issue each week? Maybe a thousand or more?

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Eleven years is a long time to pick up clues, mic drops here and there, posts posted, comments made, emails sent and received. But of course you dismiss that, because I'm an apologist for the site. Shrug.

You ARE an apologist for the site, EB, but that's besides the point.
I don't doubt that over eleven years, you formed a strong impression about how some things are done, but that's still not the hard evidence that sometimes you ask other people to provide. Not you specifically, I am talking in general. So let's hold ourselves to the standard that we ask from other people, that's all.

 

[LonerMedic]

Hi everyone,
Just wanted to share something I recently went through and hopefully get some support or guidance.
The third part of my ongoing series was recently sent back with the label “AI work,” even though I wrote every word myself. I’ve been building this story slowly, and the feedback from earlier parts has been encouraging. So this was honestly quite disheartening.

To make things clear:
1. I do not use AI to write my stories. I only use the free version of Grammarly for basic grammar and typo checks, which, as I understand, falls well within Lit’s fair use policy.
2. I’ve also been actively seeking help. I first posted on the Lit forum for editing feedback, also contacted a few editors from Lit’s official editor list, and reached out via Discord and Reddit to improve consistency and flow like any learning writer would.
3. I even sent a PM to Laurel with screenshots of Google Chat proving my edits and conversations happened before submission.

I did not submit a new story; I simply resubmitted the same sent-back version in a new Word file, with a short explanation and minor edits (grammar, phrasing, and flow)

I fully understand the need for moderation and caution around AI content, and I respect the team’s role. My only hope is to make sure genuine writers don’t get discouraged or mislabeled, especially when we’re openly asking for help and trying to improve.


So I’m asking:

• Has anyone else faced this kind of situation?
• What can I do next if the story is flagged again despite my efforts?
• Any Advice or comments from fellow authors ?

It's BS. I submitted one 3 times and it was rejected for AI. I made a new account, wrote a horrible story with multiple spelling mistakes and bad grammer, still got rejected for AI.

Total BS trying to write on this site.

 

[StillStunned]

It's BS. I submitted one 3 times and it was rejected for AI. I made a new account, wrote a horrible story with multiple spelling mistakes and bad grammer, still got rejected for AI.

Total BS trying to write on this site.

Sorry to hear that your stories were rejected. Have you asked yourself why they might trigger an AI rejection?

 

[AwkwardlySet]

In addition, the non-apologists seem to conveniently forget that the standard for mitigating false positives (resubmission with an Authors' Note) so often gets the job done and is, frankly, not much of an imposition.

Where are you even coming from with this? How can you know how often resubmitting with a note works? If anything, the impression I had from those authors who did come to AH to seek advice is that that approach doesn't work often at all.

See, this is the same thing that I was saying to EB: It's absurd how many positivistic, or shall we call them apologistic, claims people offhandedly make in these discussions, and no one disputes them. But as soon as someone makes a different kind of claim, people immediately jump to asking for evidence, data, statistics, etc.
Let's give both kinds of claims the same scrutiny.

 

[RagnarHairyBreeches]

Yes, I'm not a professional writer, am never going to be.

I'm not looking to get paid for my 'writing', I'm not expecting to make any money out of it at all.

I'm not going to submit my 'work' to any contest or competition or whatever.

I intend to be completely open/honest in acknowledging my use of AI.

Yes indeed, I agree, writing is a pleasurable pursuit - of course it is. But that's the problem, it's easy for me to get sucked in and spend way too much time on the minute details - precisely because I like to add "realism" to my stories. It used to be, e.g., if my characters were in a hotel room, then I'd find myself trying to describe every little detail of the hotel room - what colour are the curtains? What furniture do they have in there? etc. And I'd get stuck.

Okay, sure, I'll keep asking for help here on Literotica. But one difficulty I have is, I write "ethnic" erotica (often interracials - Caucasian dudes with South Asian women) - and maybe most folks here can't relate to that particular sensibility.

But my main aim in writing erotica is to share my sexual fantasies with the world. To create a world in which the fantasies "happened". And hoping that somebody, somewhere, might also find my fantasies sexually arousing.

Well, you could try it and see how it goes. I’ve always been curious myself.

The thing that pounds at the back of my mind is that of all the AI material I’ve read is that it’s crap. Bland random words that kind of form a sentence but often don’t say anything.

If a story is coming from your brain, you’ll put those thoughts down, you’ll work on them, shaping them into the sentences you want. Job done. It takes time.

If on the other hand you get AI to do it, it'll be fast, but then you'll have to read each sentence to check that it makes sense and is not simply meaningless padding. That’s also going to take time. It may well take more time. There will be flaws. Just like six-fingered images produced by AI are common, your AI generated story will introduce aspects that make no sense, and the trick will be to find them and do something about it.

You might get to the stage when your edited AI story is good enough for publication. Not a great story, just an okay, maybe this’ll do type story. It’s published and people will read a few pages and think, “What a wishy washy load of dribble.” Skip it and move on.

On the other hand if the ideas you had crystallize into an exciting, funny, intriguing page turner then you’ll develop a following and you can be proud of your work.

 

[Voboy]

Where are you even coming from with this? How can you know how often resubmitting with a note works? If anything, the impression I had from those authors who did come to AH to seek advice is that that approach doesn't work often at all.

See, this is the same thing that I was saying to EB: It's absurd how many positivistic, or shall we call them apologistic, claims people offhandedly make in these discussions, and no one disputes them. But as soon as someone makes a different kind of claim, people immediately jump to asking for evidence, data, statistics, etc.
Let's give both kinds of claims the same scrutiny.

Relax. I'm not making some sort of outrageous claim here. I only know what gets posted here in the AH on this topic; many claim that AI false positives are occurring at some ridiculously high rate, and that there is no appeal. I've read almost all those threads. The usual suggestion is to resubmit with an Authors' Note, and very frequently there is a reply by the OP that "that worked! Thanks!" or there is no reply at all, which suggests resolution occurred (since I think a writer outraged enough to start a thread is likely to post about it if the suggested solution still brings no satisfaction).

I'm not setting out to prove anything. I have no idea what the site does or does not do in seeking AI evidence. I don't care, honestly. It doesn't affect me. I don't badger anyone for statistics or evidence at all. Feel free to continue being outraged; I'm sorry I tried to contribute.

Enjoy!

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Relax. I'm not making some sort of outrageous claim here. I only know what gets posted here in the AH on this topic; many claim that AI false positives are occurring at some ridiculously high rate, and that there is no appeal. I've read almost all those threads. The usual suggestion is to resubmit with an Authors' Note, and very frequently there is a reply by the OP that "that worked! Thanks!" or there is no reply at all, which suggests resolution occurred (since I think a writer outraged enough to start a thread is likely to post about it if the suggested solution still brings no satisfaction).

I'm not setting out to prove anything. I have no idea what the site does or does not do in seeking AI evidence. I don't care, honestly. It doesn't affect me. I don't badger anyone for statistics or evidence at all. Feel free to continue being outraged; I'm sorry I tried to contribute.

Enjoy!

You misjudged my tone. Well, or it came out wrong from my side. I don't always measure words properly, especially when I write them on my phone. I've always valued your input.

Anyway, I was challenging your view of how many of these rejections work out after a simple resubmission. My impression is very different, but more than that, I feel we put criticism through far, far more scrutiny than we do praise and positive posts about the site. My criticism is always challenged one way or another, but positive posts never are, even when they aren't objectively true.

 

[Jason_D_Karl]

Hi everyone,
Just wanted to share something I recently went through and hopefully get some support or guidance.
The third part of my ongoing series was recently sent back with the label “AI work,” even though I wrote every word myself. I’ve been building this story slowly, and the feedback from earlier parts has been encouraging. So this was honestly quite disheartening.

To make things clear:
1. I do not use AI to write my stories. I only use the free version of Grammarly for basic grammar and typo checks, which, as I understand, falls well within Lit’s fair use policy.
2. I’ve also been actively seeking help. I first posted on the Lit forum for editing feedback, also contacted a few editors from Lit’s official editor list, and reached out via Discord and Reddit to improve consistency and flow like any learning writer would.
3. I even sent a PM to Laurel with screenshots of Google Chat proving my edits and conversations happened before submission.

I did not submit a new story; I simply resubmitted the same sent-back version in a new Word file, with a short explanation and minor edits (grammar, phrasing, and flow)

I fully understand the need for moderation and caution around AI content, and I respect the team’s role. My only hope is to make sure genuine writers don’t get discouraged or mislabeled, especially when we’re openly asking for help and trying to improve.


So I’m asking:

• Has anyone else faced this kind of situation?
• What can I do next if the story is flagged again despite my efforts?
• Any Advice or comments from fellow authors ?

I am still in pending status for my first story on Literotica, so I'm no expert on this issue. However, I would suggest testing your writing on an AI detection app to see what parts of it get flagged as "likely AI". For example, zerogpt (dot) com will scan up 15000 characters for free. It's accuracy leaves a lot to be desired, but it might make similar mistakes to whatever AI detector Literotica uses.

Another thing to be aware of is that AI gen stories overuse certain constructions and expressions, so having them in your story might lead to a false AI detection. These overused items include:

"neon"
"was palpable"
"newfound"
"a mix of" (any two emotions)
"a blur of"
"leaned back" or "leaned in"
"tapestry"
"dance of"
"deep breath"

Parenthetical expressions or gerund phrases, especially after the word "said" such as: "'No,' he said, his fists clenched." Or "She kept her head down, hoping to go unnoticed."

 

[StillStunned]

I am still in pending status for my first story on Literotica, so I'm no expert on this issue. However, I would suggest testing your writing on an AI detection app to see what parts of it get flagged as "likely AI". For example, zerogpt (dot) com will scan up 15000 characters for free. It's accuracy leaves a lot to be desired, but it might make similar mistakes to whatever AI detector Literotica uses.

Another thing to be aware of is that AI gen stories overuse certain constructions and expressions, so having them in your story might lead to a false AI detection. These overused items include:

"neon"
"was palpable"
"newfound"
"a mix of" (any two emotions)
"a blur of"
"leaned back" or "leaned in"
"tapestry"
"dance of"
"deep breath"

Parenthetical expressions or gerund phrases, especially after the word "said" such as: "'No,' he said, his fists clenched." Or "She kept her head down, hoping to go unnoticed."

That describes half my stories, at least. And none of them have ever been flagged as AI.

 

[SinderellaSin]

Hi everyone,
Just wanted to share something I recently went through and hopefully get some support or guidance.
The third part of my ongoing series was recently sent back with the label “AI work,” even though I wrote every word myself. I’ve been building this story slowly, and the feedback from earlier parts has been encouraging. So this was honestly quite disheartening.

To make things clear:
1. I do not use AI to write my stories. I only use the free version of Grammarly for basic grammar and typo checks, which, as I understand, falls well within Lit’s fair use policy.
2. I’ve also been actively seeking help. I first posted on the Lit forum for editing feedback, also contacted a few editors from Lit’s official editor list, and reached out via Discord and Reddit to improve consistency and flow like any learning writer would.
3. I even sent a PM to Laurel with screenshots of Google Chat proving my edits and conversations happened before submission.

I did not submit a new story; I simply resubmitted the same sent-back version in a new Word file, with a short explanation and minor edits (grammar, phrasing, and flow)

I fully understand the need for moderation and caution around AI content, and I respect the team’s role. My only hope is to make sure genuine writers don’t get discouraged or mislabeled, especially when we’re openly asking for help and trying to improve.


So I’m asking:

• Has anyone else faced this kind of situation?
• What can I do next if the story is flagged again despite my efforts?
• Any Advice or comments from fellow authors ?

So i feel your pain from being rejected. Mine is the opposite, I don't concentrate on punctuation and quotation marks for conversation. I am anti ai. Maybe your writing is so good they think it's to good. Maybe your phrases match up with AI where I am just common.


Just remember, enjoy your writing and yes a knock back puts you down, but you get up more determined. I look forward to your third part, you will get it through just like im editing one for the sixth time. I battle literotica just to share my work. It dominates it outs me down but every now and again it says well done your a good girl.

You will get there!!!

 

[bob03567]

After submitting 4 different stories and having them all flagged as AI I gave up. It shouldn't be this hard to post something that your not making a cent on. I wrote my stories to give others the pleasure of reading. If Lit is going to make it this difficult I won't post here anymore. There are other sites and yes I've started using them. In fact so far I've received 0 bad comments on my stories unlike that crap that I've gotten over the years here. Maybe I'll come back and start reposting when Lit starts to see there AI checker is seriously flaud at actually finding AI stuff vs stories wrote by actual people and I refuse to change the way I write my stories just to please one website.

 

[RagnarHairyBreeches]

I refuse to change the way I write my stories just to please one website.

And nor should you, but if your writing style is identical to what AI would come up with then you should spend some time looking at how you write in a critical way. I find AI output too wordy. Often with questionable grammar choices. Some of it makes no sense. Perhaps you should let some actual people see what you've written. They may be able to spot some issues.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

After submitting 4 different stories and having them all flagged as AI I gave up. It shouldn't be this hard to post something that your not making a cent on. I wrote my stories to give others the pleasure of reading. If Lit is going to make it this difficult I won't post here anymore. There are other sites and yes I've started using them. In fact so far I've received 0 bad comments on my stories unlike that crap that I've gotten over the years here. Maybe I'll come back and start reposting when Lit starts to see there AI checker is seriously flaud at actually finding AI stuff vs stories wrote by actual people and I refuse to change the way I write my stories just to please one website.

Your case is certainly interesting. You've been publishing stories here for almost fifteen years, resulting in 40+ stories and 4k+ followers.

I imagine that mild website apologists will now speculate that your style is bland and that it triggers Laurel's algorithm in some way, so it's not her fault, really, it's yours.
And if you dare to post a snippet of your work, the website's Inspector Clouseau will discover the exact way in which you cheated and used AI to write your stories.

I think your decision to go elsewhere with your stories is a smart one. While I imagine that there is a good number of authors who are actually using AI and trying to submit such work as their own, there is undoubtedly a non-negligible percentage of authors who get falsely flagged for AI.
Either way, it's likely not worth the hassle to try to prove yourself to Laurel. Writing and publishing stories for free on a site like this should be fun and exciting rather than a long cycle of frustration.

Best of luck.

 

[AwkwardMD]

After submitting 4 different stories and having them all flagged as AI I gave up. It shouldn't be this hard to post something that your not making a cent on. I wrote my stories to give others the pleasure of reading. If Lit is going to make it this difficult I won't post here anymore. There are other sites and yes I've started using them. In fact so far I've received 0 bad comments on my stories unlike that crap that I've gotten over the years here. Maybe I'll come back and start reposting when Lit starts to see there AI checker is seriously flaud at actually finding AI stuff vs stories wrote by actual people and I refuse to change the way I write my stories just to please one website.

I'm surprised nobody picked up on the fact that after getting a story rejected his solution was to write another whole story. And then another whole story. And then another whole story. If I spent months working on one of mine and it got flagged, I'd be fucking pissed.

Easy come, easy go.

 

[Bamagan]

I'm surprised nobody picked up on the fact that after getting a story rejected his solution was to write another whole story. And then another whole story. And then another whole story. If I spent months working on one of mine and it got flagged, I'd be fucking pissed.

Easy come, easy go.

I'll drink to that, Doc Awk.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I'll drink to that, Doc Awk.