"AI" Rejection

[TheArsonist]

@jhealy55 Never, not once. I have never been flagged for AI and only one time had an issue for any problem with a story.

You keep repeating this point, but it's not really relevant.

It's like if we were discussing trans bathroom-ban bills, and some people were pointing out that aside from discriminating against trans people, they also put at risk cis people who get mistaken for being trans (such as cis women who don't look sufficiently feminine in the eyes of some passing bigot), and you kept chiming in "I have never been mistaken for being trans!"

 

[StillStunned]

In the eyes of purists from the anti-AI brigade, the fact that they haven't been flagged so far is evidence that the detection system is "working." Even though there is a high probability of personal prioritization in their specific cases.

If anyone is getting "personal prioritisation", I doubt it's because of some kind of favouritism on Laurel's part.

If anyone's stories are approved faster, it's probably because Laurel - or Laurel's AI detector, if she uses one - has seen enough of their work to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I've only been posting stories here since the summer, and my stories go through just fine. Maybe by now Laurel has seen enough of my stories that she knows there's no AI involved - no grammar checks, no suggestions, just me myself considering every single word, sentence and paragraph until I'm pleased with the result. No formulaic wording, no contrived vocabulary just because I don't have confidence in simple words to tell my story.

Does that make me an "anti-AI purist"? Sure, quite likely. I like to write, and I wouldn't trust any machine (and I've been dealing with things like machine translation for 20+ years) to produce anything I'd put my name to. Like I mention above, it's formulaic and contrived.

Either way, this isn't about my preferences. It's about Laurel's preferences, as stated in the site's rules. Those rules state "no AI". If you want to experiment with AI-assisted stories, try finding a site that facilitates what you want, instead of demanding that Lit should accommodate you and complaining that "purists" must be enjoying "personal prioritisation".

 

[Np81la]

The same thing is happening to me, after 25 published chapters of my story they sent back chapter 26 for this reason.
I guess my main problem is that english is not my native language and I write everything in spanish and then use a translator.
Right now I have no idea what I have to change because it's all written by myself, without any help from any AI.
If anyone has a solution I would appreciate it.
By the way, I have also written this message in spanish and then used a translator. I understand English perfectly but I feel much more comfortable writing in Spanish, which is my native language.

I have the same problem but with Portuguese.

 

[jhealy55]

Careful, lad. Some of us might be sipping on our morning coffee, and these posts could choke us with laughter.

If it's indeed so "formulaic and contrived" (and it is), there's probably no need to worry so much down there in the brigades' bunker.

Not sure this is helping your case.

I came into this thread thinking one thing and the more I watch the back/forth, not so much.

Thing is, writing takes time/effort. Particularly when you are just getting started. Which is fine, because talent only gets you so far. Its what you learn along the way that shapes your unique voice. There's no shortcut for that. Just like songwriting, playing an instrument, running marathons or cooking really well.

There's always a quicker easier way. Download a sample, take a bus, order a food kit. Nobody shows up from the shortcut police and throws you in cuffs because you're not a 'purist'. You just won't develop the ability, muscle and experience that makes doing those things worthwhile. that's our 'bias'.

No one wants to see their hard work rejected in error. No one.

Neither does anyone want the submission queue flooded with entries that are done in a fraction of the time, without the same level of effort. Just like I wouldn't want to try and run a marathon getting passed by thousands of out if shape people on mopeds spewing exhaust fumes. Guess that makes me a 'purist'.

as with all things, if you've broken down a door and the old guard won't let you in, go form your own community. If it really is the way of the future, you will be in at the start of something that will only grow over time. And there will plenty of others ready to join you.

If so, then this place will always be the home of small-batch, craft-brewed, hand-rolled, artisanal, free-range, organic erotica. for purists. who are into that kind of thing.

I'm actually okay with that. You should be too.

 

[jhealy55]

Go ahead and try writing us some juicy erotica via AI. Let us know how easy it was... I'm sure you'll be back in an hour.

Missed the part where I ever said the product would be 'juicy'. I suspect little to none of it is. I don't subscribe to the million monkey typewriter theory.

you're kind of making my point. and doing a really bad job of making one that might move the needle in this debate. I would stop digging.

Look, if you just got thrown out of the pool at a private party for peeing in the water because the owner had started adding reactive dye to the water, how you responds says everything:

If you start out by denying you peed but there's only a purple cloud around you, it undermines your case.

If you want to argue that there are false positives in that process, fine, but the owner is comfortable with refusing pool privileges to anyone who creates purple water if it's the only way to ensure a pee free pool. If certain lotions, deodorants or conditioners create false positives, stop using them any time you come over to use their pool

If you point out that anyone could have been peeing for years before they started adding the dye, you might have a point, but again, no one at the party is in favor of pee and most are grateful that steps are being taken now to keep it out

At the point that you start making the case that a little pee never hurt anyone based on the volume of water in the pool and mocking the owner and their guests as 'purists' because they don't agree, you're not winning any new fans at that party.

Once you start demanding to know exactly which dye is being used, how the process works and what the minimal detection thresholds are, people start assuming it's not an issue of 'fairness' that is driving your interest.

when people point out that no one uses that dye in the community pool at the rec center and it's a non-issue over there, complaining that the water in that pool is gross and full of pee kind of makes their point for them

at this point, you can create your own pool and invite whomever you wish to join you. If you believe in 'fairness', you should probably disclose up-front that you want to be able to pee in your own pool, but don't want anyone else to. again, all good, but good luck attracting guests on those terms

If you value the water quality of the initial pool party, you just have to stop doing things that turn the water purple and you will be welcome to stay. it's not perfect, but it's the rule.

it's also not the only pool in town.

you just have to decide if it's right for you.

Because to the casual observer, it's getting hard to tell if you're really here to swim, pee or argue.

 

[djrip]

No one wants to see their hard work rejected in error. No one

And that's the most important point being made here.

Neither does anyone want the submission queue flooded with entries that are done in a fraction of the time, without the same level of effort.

I couldn't possibly care less if other people use AI to create shit stories. Just like I don't care if people whip out shit stories by hand in 30 minutes and submit them. I'm not reading them and neither are many other people.

Once you start demanding to know exactly which dye is being used, how the process works and what the minimal detection thresholds are, people start assuming it's not an issue of 'fairness' that is driving your interest.

It's been thoroughly explained why people being falsely rejected would like to know what is being used to determine if they should be rejected. They want some objective standard which it is possible to follow, as opposed to "oh well I still think it reads like AI..."

at this point, you can create your own pool and invite whomever you wish to join you. If you believe in 'fairness', you should probably disclose up-front that you want to be able to pee in your own pool, but don't want anyone else to.

What a fail at understanding the situation. No one has argued that they should be able to use AI and no one else should. No one has argued that anyone should be allowed to use full AI. There are a couple of people who have argued for grammar reworkers and others who have argued that those are too close to using AI, but no one has said they should get to use grammar programs and other people shouldn't.

 

[StillStunned]

B is AI.
I have a slight preference for A, but it would need some editing.

 

[StillStunned]

Neither is AI. I wrote them both. But your guess is as good as that of any detector.

Well, aren't you clever? You tell people to chose one, and then say it's neither.

For what it's worth, the main reason why I chose B was that A says "bore through" where it should be "bored through". That made me look closer at B, and it looked off, as if it was deliberately rewritten, either using AI suggestions or by looking for synonyms and alternative phrasings.

 

[djrip]

Well, aren't you clever? You tell people to chose one, and then say it's neither.

For what it's worth, the main reason why I chose B was that A says "bore through" where it should be "bored through". That made me look closer at B, and it looked off, as if it was deliberately rewritten, either using AI suggestions or by looking for synonyms and alternative phrasings.

So I can clearly *not* choose the wine next to me...

 

[StillStunned]

So I can clearly *not* choose the wine next to me...

I don't understand your comment.

 

[djrip]

I don't understand your comment.

Sorry, princess Bride. Both wine cups were poisoned.

 

[jhealy55]

And that's the most important point being made here.


I couldn't possibly care less if other people use AI to create shit stories. Just like I don't care if people whip out shit stories by hand in 30 minutes and submit them. I'm not reading them and neither are many other people.


It's been thoroughly explained why people being falsely rejected would like to know what is being used to determine if they should be rejected. They want some objective standard which it is possible to follow, as opposed to "oh well I still think it reads like AI..."

What a fail at understanding the situation. No one has argued that they should be able to use AI and no one else should. No one has argued that anyone should be allowed to use full AI. There are a couple of people who have argued for grammar reworkers and others who have argued that those are too close to using AI, but no one has said they should get to use grammar programs and other people shouldn't.

The objective standard is 'don't do things that turn the water purple'.

again, it's not perfect, but the host gets to make the rules. their pool. their party.

I'm also not hearing anyone claim they were unfairly rejected because they never used any AI. Feels like a couple of the thread participants have actually outed themselves by their own admissions. Their complaint seems to be 'I want to use more AI than you allow'.

Most of the questions seem to revolve around how much sexual activity one can have and still wear white at their wedding. which acts? how many times? how many partners? how frequently? what standard of proof? what if everyone in town claims I'm not a virgin, but they don't have actual proof? My point is that no one is asking for tips to maintaining chastity in every day life. they are asking how they can still maintain plausible deniability without having to endure the drudgery of actual chastity. there's a diff

I don't have any issue with people AI creating stories and came into this thread 24 hours ago, just trying to understand the debate. I also don't care if people want to make celebrity fakes, etc. Just not into it. so I don't frequent sites that feature that content because I don't want to wade through it looking for something that I am into. Some people aren't into augmented breasts. I get it. if this place becomes like one of those things I don't enjoy, I'll go somewhere else. I suspect many others would do the same

I also don' have any insight into the process of managing the submission queue here and have no way to gauge how much this is gunking up the works. AI generated/assisted/enhanced might not be 'better' or even 'as good', but no one debates that it is capable of turning out large volumes of text in a much shorter time. If submission volume has gone way up since these tools became available, then you can't blame those who do the work for how they are managing the workflow. or ask others to wait longer for review/approval because the queue is getting flooded with entries that turn the water purple. they are looking at a lot of other things besides AI, many of which could cause the site to be closed if they didn't review/reject them. that still takes time, with human eyes, looking for inference, implication, etc.

Also, not sure you're extrapolating the full range of the possible outcomes here either. this isn't a paid site. within reason, they can do whatever they want:

There's nothing to say the site can't allow stories to go through but tag everything that tested positive to allow the readers to decide for themselves.

or create an "AI-assisted" category and funnel everything that trips the alarm into a single queue that grinds to a snail's place while anything that doesn't gets handled under the past model.

or add a standard submission fee going forward.

Likewise they can also reduce/waive the submission fee for 'platinum' contributors using any standard they want. (talk about prioritization)

 

[jhealy55]

Or add a "AI rejected resubmission" fee that increases each time the same story comes back through.

How important is it that your story gets published here? How much are you willing to pay to get extra consideration/prioritization?

my sincere advice: stop doing things that turn the water purple. stop working the refs. put your focus on creating the unique stories you want to tell. even if you have to post them somewhere else.

come on in. the water is actually really nice.

 

[alohadave]

The objective standard is 'don't do things that turn the water purple'.

Now imagine a chemical that turned the water purple randomly even if there is no urine present. Or in the presence of precursor materials that also trigger the reaction (which, incidentally, is why this is a bad example, various normally occurring chemicals will react just like urine does in water).

That's what AI detectors are doing. False positive matches. It is triggering on things that are similar enough to how some people write that they are getting flagged as having been written by AI.

 

[StillStunned]

Sorry, princess Bride. Both wine cups were poisoned.

Ah, got it. I was pouring myself a glass of wine just as I read your comment, so my mind was on more literal things.

 

[StillStunned]

There's no "or" here. I simply mimicked the machine's process. It took me about two minutes to select the right synonyms---something a machine performs in a split second. Apparently, I'll have to work the hard way from now on.

That's what most of us do. The difference with AI is that we look at the text overall, try to find the feel, the balance, the rhythm. Read each word, each sentence in relation to the one before and the one after. *That* is what makes a text readable.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I think I'm done. One doesn't have to participate when it's a pissing match. Especially, when one is a female. Men can aim their piss easer than women.

 

[jhealy55]

Now imagine a chemical that turned the water purple randomly even if there is no urine present. Or in the presence of precursor materials that also trigger the reaction (which, incidentally, is why this is a bad example, various normally occurring chemicals will react just like urine does in water).

That's what AI detectors are doing. False positive matches. It is triggering on things that are similar enough to how some people write that they are getting flagged as having been written by AI.

has that happened to you personally? can we see the examples? again absolutely no AI-assist, but rejected as AI-assisted.

if the complaint is "AI says it is AI", what's the counter-argument? "I say it's me?"

what should the standard be then? only things that can be proven to be definitively 100% human generated or anything that doesn't turn the water purple? what's the effect on time, effort and focus in the submission queue of each standard?

I'll allow that there are many things that can cause the water to turn purple. I'm saying if you have the choice, don't use them if you want to swim in this particular pool

I'm trying to find out if there's anything organic out there that turns the water purple and how prevalent it is in the gen pop.

 

[StillStunned]

I think I'm done. One doesn't have to participate when it's a pissing match. Especially, when one is a female. Men can aim their piss easer than women.

Even better, if we twirl ours around, everyone ducks away and we win by default. Wheeee!

 

[jhealy55]

I think I'm done. One doesn't have to participate when it's a pissing match. Especially, when one is a female. Men can aim their piss easer than women.

feeling you on this. I'm a pretty good aim, but like monkey-poop fights at the zoo, even the eventual winner is covered by the time it's over

 

[jhealy55]

My story that was rejected was not changed by anything beyond a spell check.

can you post the first page or so here so we can see what tripped the alarm? genuinely curious

 

[nice90sguy]

she said after listening for a while.
she shouted and hung up.
she asked urgently.
he told her as he started to get dressed.
he said and went to the bathroom.
he said with a hearty chuckle.
he asked, trying to be helpful.

Maybe don't use that pattern so much? I have no idea whether this is what tripped it, but it might be.

 

[alohadave]

feeling you on this. I'm a pretty good aim, but like monkey-poop fights at the zoo, even the eventual winner is covered by the time it's over

You keep flinging the poop, dude.

You come in to the thread late, throwing around accusations and declarations like we haven't been through all this in the pages before you discovered the thread.

can you post the first page or so here so we can see what tripped the alarm? genuinely curious

You are no one who has any say in what gets approved, so don't pretend like your analysis will help the story get approved.

Besides that, you have no insight into why Laurel kicked it back. Unless you are an alt.

I'll allow that there are many things that can cause the water to turn purple. I'm saying if you have the choice, don't use them if you want to swim in this particular pool

I'm trying to find out if there's anything organic out there that turns the water purple and how prevalent it is in the gen pop.

The pool is an analogy (that you started). If you want to look it up, go for it. I'm not discussing this (or anything else) further with you.

 

[jhealy55]

I actually read through the thread before commenting. Haven't accused anyone of anything and have tried really hard to understand the parameters of the debate and point out where there might be jumps in logic or blind spots. Again, because I am trying to understand if the process has changed and is likely to start rejecting authors like me unfairly.

My final point is that if you want to make a change to how the site submission rules work, you are going to need to get a lot of open-minded and persuade-able authors to come over to your side and take up your cause. I was fully both before I started to engage on this thread. Everything I've seen so far has pushed me farther into the other camp.

I can tell you that the readers here outweigh the authors by a huge margin if my list of followers is any representative sample. They simply don't know and don't care that this debate is going on. They are just looking for something they enjoy. They also don't create any of the content that brings other readers here.

So you have no way to connect with most of the users and some of you are mocking those you can reach. Getting people to tap out of this thread because they disagree with your POV isn't doing anything to improve your chance to effect change to the policy and more than likely hardening opposition.

I don't want to see anyone's hard work get rejected, but nothing on here has encouraged me to join your cause. Just the opposite in fact.

 

[jhealy55]

I was trying to improve my dialogues...


<center><b>A hasty departure</b></center>
It was early in the morning when Amanda's phone rang. Adam was annoyed at the sudden awakening, but also amused when he recognized the tune as "The Imperial March". He shook Amanda's shoulder to wake her. When she came to, she was in a panic.

She answered the phone, "What is it, Dad?"

"No, Dad, I didn't forget we were supposed to visit Mom's grave today," she said after listening for a while.

"It's what? Already past 7? I'm so sorry, I'll be right there!" she shouted and hung up.

She looked at Adam with wide eyes.

"My dad, I have to go. Really, please?" she asked urgently.

He looked at her with his best poker face. Amanda's panic was palpable. A minute passed, then another, and her face reflected her inner turmoil.

"It's okay, Amanda. But you have to meet Candy at the store at 5:00 and help her carry my things," he told her as he started to get dressed.

"My father and I are going away for the night. Mom's grave is with her family on another island," she said.

"I see." He thought for a moment, "Then tell Candy not to deliver today, but tomorrow."

"Thank you, Adam, thank you very much. See you tomorrow at 6 PM?"

"Make it 7, I'm sure I'll be having dinner with Sally," he said and went to the bathroom.

When he came out of the shower, Amanda was already gone.

<center><b>Breakfast with Sally</b></center>
As Adam entered the hotel dining room, he paused to look for Sally. She was already seated in front of her full tray, but had not yet noticed him. As he navigated the buffet with his tray, his eyes drifted back to her several times. She did not seem to like the oatmeal in front of her, sticking her spoon into it listlessly. In fact, it almost looked like she was trying to kill the poor dish.

"You know, killing it won't improve its taste," he said with a hearty chuckle.

"Good morning, Adam. Yes, you're right, killing it won't help. But really, why is healthy food always so bland?" she complained without looking up, stabbing the oatmeal several times in quick succession.

"It doesn't have to be. Have you tried honey?" he asked, trying to be helpful.

The kindest thing I can say is to keeping working this. Dialogue is really tough. Talk it through out loud and see how it flows as a natural conversation if you were listening in.

I'd look at the way you format time "7", "5:00", "6 PM". it's very inconsistent in a very few lines of text.

Just like sticking a utensil listlessly doesn't flow into looking like she was trying to kill the dish. it's a little jarring because the action doesn't set us up for the characterization/perception of the other viewer.

The good news is that working through this process will make you better. every writer has been at the stage you are now and it was only by grinding through the process of refining their voice that they improved.

stick with it. keep grinding.