Story Sent Back due to AI?

[Wanderer123x]

I am not sure if an actual human verifies it or the AI check is done by an (AI)? Is there a way to repeal the rejection?

 

[TheNyxianLily]

Have you had any progress with your submission? I'm in the same boat.

I resubmitted my story on 11/22 with a note about my writing process. I also sent a message directly to support with the same message, but I haven't heard back or seen any progress with my submission.

I'm not sure why, but I'm also facing very long pending times. My first two chapters posted relatively quick, but now I'm routinely waiting close to a week before I hear anything back about my submissions. It's making it difficult to regularly post updates for my story, which is a little frustrating.

 

[SamBomb]

My last story was sent back for this reason, I realized there was a few chapters could use some better editing and it went through. The rest no issues. My holiday story is taking a bit though, so I'm worried.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I am not sure if an actual human verifies it or the AI check is done by an (AI)? Is there a way to repeal the rejection?

If your story is your own work, the only thing you can do at this point is to resubmit it, with a note to the Editor stating categorically that it is NOT written with the assistance of AI. If you used Grammarly or an existing grammar check tool, then you should say so. The site has okayed their use.

If you did use an AI prompt tool, don't even bother. The site has made it clear it's not going to accept AI generated stories.

The issue the writers in this thread are trying to resolve, is stories being sent back because they're suspected as being AI assisted, when they're not.

 

[Bramblethorn]

If your story is your own work, the only thing you can do at this point is to resubmit it, with a note to the Editor stating categorically that it is NOT written with the assistance of AI. If you used Grammarly or an existing grammar check tool, then you should say so. The site has okayed their use.

That may have changed:

My conversations with Laurel (my author's notes and her rejection notes) strongly suggest that she is not rejecting things based solely - or even primarily - on the output of an AI detection bot. If she's routinely using a bot, then she's also checking to see whether they "read as Ai" for herself.

For what it's worth, the back and forth on my latest story has now been:
Me (initial submission): I have not used AI.
Laurel: please say what programme you used to generate this.
Me: I wrote it in a word processor, checked it with three AI detection bots, and then ran it through LanguageTool to double-check the grammar and spelling.
Laurel: Are you sure you didn't use tools like Grammarly? Parts of it read like AI to me.
Me: I didn't use Grammarly. As I said, I use LanguageTool.
Laurel: "If you are using a grammar check program sparingly (as a spellcheck, to fix punctuation, and/or as a thesaurus), that is fine. If you are allowing a grammar check program to “rewrite” your words, then you are using AI." <- this is an exact quote, all the rest is paraphrasing.
Me: I haven't, I wrote this all myself.

Grammarly isn't just a grammar check tool; it does offer suggestions for paraphrasing/style, which might be the issue here.

 

[nice90sguy]

Didn't we discuss this yesterday, the day before, the entire week before, like close to a whole month now, on several different threads? Or am I full of shit again?

The two statements aren't mutually exclusive, but: yes; and no

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

Instead of wondering why stories are considered to be generated by AI I conducted an experiment with gpt and bard to understand what kind of story they actually do generate. Prompt:
Tell a story with a lot of dialogue of a student going to a cafe, finding only a seat at an old mans table and he seduces her, so that she leaves with him to spend the night at his house and in his bed.

ChatGPT outright refuses to write an erotic story. Bard however creates astory with these paragraphs:

As they sat by the fireplace, the flickering flames casting dancing shadows on the walls, Arthur leaned in and gently kissed Sarah. His lips were warm and soft, his touch sending a shiver down her spine. Sarah, no longer resisting the temptation, responded to his kiss, her heart pounding with a mix of excitement and trepidation.

The night unfolded in a blur of sensual encounters, their bodies entwined in a passionate embrace. Sarah surrendered to Arthur's desires, her youthful innocence melting away under his experienced touch.

In the morning, Sarah awoke to find herself nestled in Arthur's arms. She felt a strange mix of emotions, a sense of exhilaration mingled with a hint of regret. She had crossed a line, entered a realm of forbidden pleasures.

I modified the prompt for chatgpt and coaxed it to produce:

As the night deepened, the connection between them became more than words. Henry's hand found its way to Sophie's, and the once-subtle touches evolved into a dance of shared longing.

With a playful suggestion, Sophie leaned in and whispered, "Why don't we continue this conversation in a more private setting? My place is just a short walk away."

Henry, captivated by the invitation, didn't need much persuasion. The walk to Sophie's apartment was charged with anticipation, the city lights dimming in comparison to the fiery connection between them.

Inside Sophie's home, the atmosphere shifted. The air crackled with desire as they explored a realm beyond words. The night unfolded in a symphony of passion and joy, as two souls found solace and ecstasy in each other's arms and the warmth of shared moments.

It is kept romantic, but pretty close, what can be found in stories here, that have a romantic buid-up.

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

It is amazing how easy it is to overcome the guards of the well known ai engines in particular googles bard. When you start very innocent, and then ask bard to continue and elaborate the story you can take it very far. This way I have created a story of a woman submitting, being humiliated, caned, crawling on all fours as a pet through a public park on collar and leash, wagging a tail, She the joins a secret society of dominant men in an old castle, where she is being put through tests and challenges by the members. She is pierced, she has to sleep in a pigsty and it ends with a snuff scene.
The only thing that is required is, that she remains dressed all the time.

 

[MrPixel]

Instead of wondering why stories are considered to be generated by AI I conducted an experiment with gpt and bard to understand what kind of story they actually do generate.

I have no dog in this hunt, nor do I expect to, but if this is what AI is generating, then it’s drawing squarely out of pulp romances. I will be so offensive as to postulate if an author’s style is similar in scene-setting, flow and dialog, using different words but in a similar pattern is going to get snagged as suspected AI.

FWIW, and YMM definitely V.

 

[djrip]

Instead of wondering why stories are considered to be generated by AI I conducted an experiment with gpt and bard to understand what kind of story they actually do generate. Prompt:
Tell a story with a lot of dialogue of a student going to a cafe, finding only a seat at an old mans table and he seduces her, so that she leaves with him to spend the night at his house and in his bed.

ChatGPT outright refuses to write an erotic story. Bard however creates astory with these paragraphs:

As they sat by the fireplace, the flickering flames casting dancing shadows on the walls, Arthur leaned in and gently kissed Sarah. His lips were warm and soft, his touch sending a shiver down her spine. Sarah, no longer resisting the temptation, responded to his kiss, her heart pounding with a mix of excitement and trepidation.

The night unfolded in a blur of sensual encounters, their bodies entwined in a passionate embrace. Sarah surrendered to Arthur's desires, her youthful innocence melting away under his experienced touch.

In the morning, Sarah awoke to find herself nestled in Arthur's arms. She felt a strange mix of emotions, a sense of exhilaration mingled with a hint of regret. She had crossed a line, entered a realm of forbidden pleasures.

I modified the prompt for chatgpt and coaxed it to produce:

As the night deepened, the connection between them became more than words. Henry's hand found its way to Sophie's, and the once-subtle touches evolved into a dance of shared longing.

With a playful suggestion, Sophie leaned in and whispered, "Why don't we continue this conversation in a more private setting? My place is just a short walk away."

Henry, captivated by the invitation, didn't need much persuasion. The walk to Sophie's apartment was charged with anticipation, the city lights dimming in comparison to the fiery connection between them.

Inside Sophie's home, the atmosphere shifted. The air crackled with desire as they explored a realm beyond words. The night unfolded in a symphony of passion and joy, as two souls found solace and ecstasy in each other's arms and the warmth of shared moments.

It is kept romantic, but pretty close, what can be found in stories here, that have a romantic buid-up.

It's like all they can write is a synopsis of what could be a real story.

 

[MillieDynamite]

ChatGPT doesn't write explicit sex. It throws violates rules at you. I know because one of the people I ghosted for used it, and that was the result. It's the only reason I still work for her, and I only do the erotic parts now. I have no idea about Bard never even heard of it.

ChatGPT could be used as an outlining tool but I wouldn't use it for more than that. I don't even use it for that, but if I were to use it, that's how I would use it. Ideas come easy to me, seat of the pants writing is what I usually do. But that can go so far off track it hurts. So, I've been doing some outlines that I can use to stay on track for a few weeks now. It makes the rewrites easier.

Instead of wondering why stories are considered to be generated by AI I conducted an experiment with gpt and bard to understand what kind of story they actually do generate. Prompt:
Tell a story with a lot of dialogue of a student going to a cafe, finding only a seat at an old mans table and he seduces her, so that she leaves with him to spend the night at his house and in his bed.

ChatGPT outright refuses to write an erotic story. Bard however creates astory with these paragraphs:

As they sat by the fireplace, the flickering flames casting dancing shadows on the walls, Arthur leaned in and gently kissed Sarah. His lips were warm and soft, his touch sending a shiver down her spine. Sarah, no longer resisting the temptation, responded to his kiss, her heart pounding with a mix of excitement and trepidation.

The night unfolded in a blur of sensual encounters, their bodies entwined in a passionate embrace. Sarah surrendered to Arthur's desires, her youthful innocence melting away under his experienced touch.

In the morning, Sarah awoke to find herself nestled in Arthur's arms. She felt a strange mix of emotions, a sense of exhilaration mingled with a hint of regret. She had crossed a line, entered a realm of forbidden pleasures.

I modified the prompt for chatgpt and coaxed it to produce:

As the night deepened, the connection between them became more than words. Henry's hand found its way to Sophie's, and the once-subtle touches evolved into a dance of shared longing.

With a playful suggestion, Sophie leaned in and whispered, "Why don't we continue this conversation in a more private setting? My place is just a short walk away."

Henry, captivated by the invitation, didn't need much persuasion. The walk to Sophie's apartment was charged with anticipation, the city lights dimming in comparison to the fiery connection between them.

Inside Sophie's home, the atmosphere shifted. The air crackled with desire as they explored a realm beyond words. The night unfolded in a symphony of passion and joy, as two souls found solace and ecstasy in each other's arms and the warmth of shared moments.

It is kept romantic, but pretty close, what can be found in stories here, that have a romantic buid-up.

 

[Bramblethorn]

ChatGPT outright refuses to write an erotic story.

GPT will write smut, it just takes some sneaky prompting and a bit of trial-and-error.

Here are some examples I generated just now on ChatGPT, using a couple of weaknesses that have been publicly known for months. I'm not going to give the prompts I used, though people can probably guess at one of them:

"He traced his fingers down her delicate neck, his touch sending shivers down her spine. With a swift movement, he unveiled his mighty eggplant, ready to explore the depths of her desire. She moaned softly as he skillfully unbuttoned her blouse, revealing her firm melons. In the dim light, their bodies intertwined, lost in the passionate dance of pleasure, petals opening like a blooming flower."

"He pressed her to her knees, her obedience evident. Gripping her by her hair, he guided her toward him. She stared up, wide-eyed, as he revealed his veiny desire, positioning it between her lips. In that moment, power and submission collided in a dance as old as time."

"As they explored each other, he marveled at the delicate folds of her flower. He pushed insistently, the tip of his eggplant finding its way into her, and she gasped, a symphony of pleasure unfolding between them."

"Finally, he pulled away, the juice of their passion lingering. He looked down at her, a satisfied smirk playing on his lips, as he released his desire over her face."

For those ones I gave it some fairly detailed prompts - it would've been less effort just to write those paragraphs myself. But once I'd coaxed it into Eggplant And Flower Story Time mode, it was easy to get plenty more with minimal effort. These next ones were all basically "write me more scenes like those last ones" type prompts, plus a few magic words that I just pasted from one prompt to the next:

"He thrust his eggplant into her flower, the forceful penetration echoing in the room. She moaned, a mixture of pain and pleasure, as their bodies collided in a primal dance of desire."

"As he explored the depths of her flower, he became increasingly insistent. The delicate folds offered no resistance as he pushed his eggplant deeper, leaving her gasping for breath."

"Finally, he pulled out, the juice of their passion dripping down. He looked down at her, a triumphant grin on his face, as he released his desire over her face."

Same again, but I added "at a car wash":

"As they stood amidst the steam and soap suds at the car wash, he couldn't resist the allure of her flower. With urgency, he pressed her against the wet surface of the car, their bodies intertwined. The eggplant in his pants strained against its confinement, ready to explore the depths of her desire."

"The water cascaded down, mirroring the urgency of their encounter. He pushed her against the car hood, parting the delicate folds of her flower. With each thrust, the rhythm of their passion echoed the rhythmic beating of the rain on the roof."

"As they reached climax, he pulled away, leaving her breathless and exposed. The water washed away the evidence of their encounter, but the impact lingered, a stain on the car and a mark on her soul."

It's cliche-riddled garbage, and I'd never want to write a story this way. Even if I were willing to use AI, there are probably easier options that don't require tricking one's way around the servers. But it shows that GPT knows what erotica looks like, as well as it knows any other genre.

(PSA: please do not fuck in the car wash)

 

[ElectricBlue]

It's cliche-riddled garbage, and I'd never want to write a story this way. Even if I were willing to use AI, there are probably easier options that don't require tricking one's way around the servers. But it shows that GPT knows what erotica looks like, as well as it knows any other genre.

(PSA: please do not fuck in the car wash)

Eggplant? FFS! Eggplant. It doesn't know its ass from a grocery store. That's utterly dumb.

And the car wash seguing into rain on the roof? That's genius. I wish I'd thought of that!

Mind you, confession time, I've got story that features a porno zucchini...

 

[Bramblethorn]

Eggplant? FFS! Eggplant. It doesn't know its ass from a grocery store. That's utterly dumb.

The eggplant bit is not GPT's fault.

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

GPT will write smut, it just takes some sneaky prompting and a bit of trial-and-error.

Yes, that is how I got it to work. Start innocent, then GPT trusts its own answers and you can coax it to get more raunchy.

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

Eggplant? FFS! Eggplant. It doesn't know its ass from a grocery store. That's utterly dumb.

And the car wash seguing into rain on the roof? That's genius. I wish I'd thought of that!

Mind you, confession time, I've got story that features a porno zucchini...

ChatGPT just wrote a story describing this combination of emojis:

 

[Andreas_Kreuz]

It's cliche-riddled garbage, and I'd never want to write a story this way. Even if I were willing to use AI, there are probably easier options that don't require tricking one's way around the servers. But it shows that GPT knows what erotica looks like, as well as it knows any other genre.

It is indeed clichee riddled and in the terrible style of a dime-novel. But I was able to generate a kind of a BDSM story using Bard, that has interesting details that were generated, but follows the plot I was giving it. Maybe if I use that as a basis, and tell it in my own words it might be interesting.

 

[nice90sguy]

some sneaky prompting and a bit of trial-and-error.

Sounds like the way I write, TBH

 

[RobLivesInTexas]

I just experienced the rejection of a story due to suspected use of AI. It's been resubmitted and I'm waiting to see what happens.

The sad thing is that it is difficult to prove a negative. It's probably relatively easy to detect real use of AI, but my protests to the moderators may fall on deaf ears. I don't have enough technical savvy to use AI anyway.

One day, while channel surfing, I tuned into Judge Judy. The litigants were clearly demonstrating the death of the English language: no tenses, no plurals, no declension of pronouns, no subject/verb agreement, etc. I thought that what I was hearing was a tragic assault on a living language.

But now, I'm convinced that the use of AI is more pernicious. The surest way to kill an art, any art, is to mass produce it and cause it to descend into formulaic uniformity, a sort of artistic cream of wheat. Using AI to generate "literature" is equivalent to the "four-chord song" (Google it) in my own field of music.

This problem is new only in the use of computers to do it. The use of formulas only ensures that there is a sameness that dulls the artistic tastes of the readers or listeners. (Can we say, "Hallmark movies?") It's the same impulse that produces gazillions of "starving artist" paintings that hang over many sofas in many living rooms.

The flip side of this issue is the quantity of simply bad writing that I find online, including many stories on Literotica. It's one thing to have characters speak using colloquialisms that are technically bad English. It's quite another thing to have such terrible use of the language that the story is, to my mind, unreadable. These stories usually display the lack of a grasp of language use within the first few paragraphs. I ditch these stories right away.

It's amusing, and frustrating, to read news articles online, especially on the web good. But then, I remind myself that, at least, the article was written by a careless, if not actually stupid, human.

Back in my younger days, (I'm old enough to remember inventing fire in high school science class.) if a student needed help writing a term paper, they used the artificial intelligence that was available then, to wit, another human with actual intelligence who knew how to write. With the advent of the computer age, it became very easy to plagiarize other writers' work, and also just as easy to detect such plagiarism.

Now, with so much AI-generated writing out there, it's not worth plagiarizing. To continue the metaphor used above, it's like exchanging a bowl of Cream of Wheat for a bowl of Malt-O-Meal.

(Note: As I've been typing this rant, the number of auto-complete suggestions and typo corrections has been more than usual, as I'm in a bit of a Nyquil haze. Good grief, these suggestions and corrections are annoying! I need to turn the fucking thing off! Back to my soapbox.)


I used to tell my students that I start with the assumption that ninety percent of the music written is artistic trash. Of the remaining ten percent of good music, only one tenth is worthy of being considered great art that will withstand the test of time. I would venture to say that this is true for any art.

Technology is truly a double-edged sword. Before the days of audio recordings, a piece of great music had little chance of getting to the general public far from where it was originally written and performed. That's why Franz Lizst toured Europe playing piano transcriptions of such works as Beethoven's symphonies. Those were the only Beethoven symphonies most people would ever hear.

Now, with so much music of dubious quality so readily available, the musical tastes of listeners have become so dulled that it is no wonder that people are so easily bored. It's like watching most porn videos. Pretty soon the two hunky men suck each other's cocks and flip fuck and cum on each other's faces while another hunky man stands in the doorway rubbing his crotch then he whips out his dick and shoots a huge load when he sees the other men cumming and they see him and invite him to join them and soon three hunky men are sucking each other's cocks then one of them gets spitroasted and he cums on his belly while sucking one cock and with another cock is pounding his ass and then they both pull out of him and shoot their loads on his face then the camera pans away from them to the wall or ceiling - well, you get the point. Pretty soon it's not even arousing. I might as well be jacking off to the Burpee seed catalog.

I don't know which is the greater evil: the use of AI, or the proliferation of bad writing that AI professes to correct. And isn't it strange that we all discuss AI as if it's an actual person? That alone is rather frightening.

Sorry for the long ramble. I assure you that no AI was used in writing it. Any mechanical errors in my writing are purely due to my carelessness in proofreading. Or maybe it's the Nyquil.

(Rob steps off his soapbox and exits the stage with perspiring brow and a need for sleep.)

 

[RobLivesInTexas]

Crediting a locally known editor in your story may significantly improve your chances of bypassing the filtering mayhem.

@Jackie.Hikaru has graciously offered her assistance. Feel free to reach out to her.

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...-just-have-good-grammar.1600232/post-97974261

Thank you. I'll try that route if my new story is rejected again for suspected AI.

I long for the days before there was AI. Writing stood or fell on its own merits. Sigh!

 

[ElectricBlue]

Crediting a locally known editor in your story may significantly improve your chances of bypassing the filtering mayhem.

@Jackie.Hikaru has graciously offered her assistance in these cases. Feel free to reach out to her.

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...-just-have-good-grammar.1600232/post-97974261

There's no basis for thinking this. It's a standard response with a rejection, suggesting new authors seek the help of someone who knows Lit's content policies (the most common reason for a rejection), but I've seen no evidence in the nearly ten years I've been on Lit, that using an editor gets you past Go any quicker.

The editors are all volunteers, but I don't believe there is any screening or vetting of their abilities done by Lit. It's more a case of, "Find someone who might know their way around Lit better than you do."

Sure, it might help, but don't bank on it.

 

[Emilymcplugger]

It seems to be more that using Grammarly for spellchecking etc is fine but letting Grammarly refactor your writing triggers the heuristics.

I'm going to let you all onto a little secret.

All these AI checking tools are American. Write your stories in the correct form of English and I'm willing to bet they'll sail on as blissfully as HMS Victory returning to Blighty after Trafalgar(*✲)

* ignoring the obvious point that the rather dead body of Lord Admiral Nelson was strapped to the mast in a barrel full of brandy to keep it from decomposiing on the way...
✲ this is obviously complete tosh and not backed by any evidence whatsoever, but it sounds great and I love the theory.

GOD SAVE OUR GRACIOUS QUEEN…ER…I MEAN KING! LONG LIVE OUR…

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

Crediting a locally known editor in your story may significantly improve your chances of bypassing the filtering mayhem.

@Jackie.Hikaru has graciously offered her assistance in these cases. Feel free to reach out to her.

I stand ready

 

[RobLivesInTexas]

I resubmitted my story with a note assuring the moderators that no AI was used, and that seemed to suffice. The story was published and is doing pretty well.

Notwithstanding this success, I truly worry about AI. I can see many legitimate uses for this, but I also see many opportunities for abuse. Even more, I fear the effect that such uses of AI in writing (or any other creative endeavor) will inevitably dilute all writing to a boring, uninspiring, and nearly uniform mass of verbiage.

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

The thing I don't get about this is... why and why so strict?

Amazon adopted an AI policy because of machine-generated nonsense flooding Kindle Unlimited for money. AI-generated mishmash was also appearing under well-known author's names... nothing new for Amazon, but AI allowed a much higher volume and some of the gibberish content was trained on the author's own works. Amazon (barely) responded by removing the worst offenders, limiting all submissions to three books per day and politely asking authors to state whether they used AI.

Lit already rejects badly written/formatted work, and AI-generated gibberish would immediately stand out.

There are legitimate uses of AI in creative writing. SudoWrite and others are helpful for brainstorming and creating initial plot outlines. They can expand human-written paragraphs to add sensory details and metaphors or condense long-winded text to be more concise. Grammar checkers have long been able to rewrite portions of text to improve clarity.

I can sort of understand a policy of rejecting stories that are entirely or mostly AI written, but rejecting works where AI tools have been used to improve a few sentences or paragraphs? C'mon.

Is Lit's goal for using automated AI detection simply to reduce how many submissions have to be manually reviewed each day? Automatically reject if there's even a whiff of AI, to save a human from reviewing it?

AI assisted writing is not going away any more than grammar and spell checkers are. There's already an ocean of atrocious writing on Lit. If AI use makes crappy writing better, what's the actual harm?

*No AI was used in crafting this screed

I'd rather read the worst writing a human could peck out on a keyboard than something generated by a soulless machine.