Advice appreciated on how to deal with editor's allegation of AI use

[EmilyMiller]

Nope ...the threads are full of people that used nothing but Word spell check and are still getting rejected multiple times for the same story. It has nothing to do with AI and everything to do with how badly AI detection tools work .... they target certain word combos that have zero to do with AI.





Because frankly this is the biggest deal Lit has ever faced in its history .... don't believe me ? Keep going and wait and see ....


This issue is something that can destroy and is actively destroying the site .... the lack of public engagement shows frankly that she doesn't care.

This is a really really big deal ...AI won't kill Lit but the overreaction and undocumented AI witch hunt will .... it is already driving away established authors and frankly the submission quality over the past 12 months can't afford to go down further. If new authors get rejected they simply leave .... the internet has changed it's not 2001 anymore they simply go elsewhere.

Have you seen how many stories ARE getting approved each day?

I don’t think this is gonna kill Lit, no matter how painful it is for those caught up in the mess.

If it was an existential threat to be doing what Laurel is doing, I bet she’d stop.

Emily

 

[ElectricBlue]

This is a really really big deal ...AI won't kill Lit but the overreaction and undocumented AI witch hunt will .... it is already driving away established authors and frankly the submission quality over the past 12 months can't afford to go down further. If new authors get rejected they simply leave .... the internet has changed it's not 2001 anymore they simply go elsewhere.

Seems like all those other places are shutting down, meanwhile Lit is still publishing more stories than it did five, ten years ago, so the numbers don't quite support your argument.

Maybe the drop in submission quality this last year (if there in fact is one, but who reads every story?) is all down to AI junk swamping the site, and now the site is doing something about it. These poor bastards are getting caught up in the cross-fire, and yes, it must be horribly frustrating, but what if the alternative's worse?

We don't know if it's an over-reaction. For all we know, the site might be rejecting multiple hundreds of stories every day. And yes, I agree, it would be nice to hear something authoritative from the site, absolutely.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Seems like all those other places are shutting down, meanwhile Lit is still publishing more stories than it did five, ten years ago, so the numbers don't quite support your argument.

Maybe the drop in submission quality this last year (if there in fact is one, but who reads every story?) is all down to AI junk swamping the site, and now the site is doing something about it. These poor bastards are getting caught up in the cross-fire, and yes, it must be horribly frustrating, but what if the alternative's worse?

We don't know if it's an over-reaction. For all we know, the site might be rejecting multiple hundreds of stories every day. And yes, I agree, it would be nice to hear something authoritative from the site, absolutely.

All of that sounds at least feasible.

I can’t imagine that Laurel and Manu are doing what they are clearly doing just because they want to annoy people.

Yes, some comms would be welcome. And a fast track appeal process. I was gonna suggest that a few humans get deputized, but I know I don’t have the time.

Emily

 

[MillieDynamite]

I thought I had an AI rejection, but it wasn't that which was the issue. I had a statement that it was part of a longer work that might be finished someday, which you can do in an event but you can't say you are. In all the time I've published her, this go around and the first, I've had three rejections based on a transposed age of 21 appearing as 12 somewhere in those stories. Yeah, back to that dsyletci I mean dyslectic thing.

 

[DrPope]

Seems like all those other places are shutting down, meanwhile Lit is still publishing more stories than it did five, ten years ago, so the numbers don't quite support your argument.

Maybe the drop in submission quality this last year (if there in fact is one, but who reads every story?) is all down to AI junk swamping the site, and now the site is doing something about it. These poor bastards are getting caught up in the cross-fire, and yes, it must be horribly frustrating, but what if the alternative's worse?

We don't know if it's an over-reaction. For all we know, the site might be rejecting multiple hundreds of stories every day. And yes, I agree, it would be nice to hear something authoritative from the site, absolutely.

For all we know, the site might be rejecting multiple hundreds of stories every day. And yes, I agree, it would be nice to hear something authoritative from the site, absolutely.

I would suggest it is more like THOUSANDS of Overtly AI written stories rejected every week but the answer isn't to hurt obviously real authors ....giving established authors the benefit of the doubt would be a good start to minimizing collateral damage

 

[DrPope]

I can’t imagine that Laurel and Manu are doing what they are clearly doing just because they want to annoy people.

Yes, some comms would be welcome. And a fast track appeal process. I was gonna suggest that a few humans get deputized, but I know I don’t have the time.

It's what they are not doing ...communicating that is doing the real damage

 

[DrPope]

I'd also raise the question of "What is AI" ....if the whole thing is AI generated from prompts ...sure BUT
AI tolls that even re-write or edit can vastly IMPROVE texts ....


as a publisher for 30 + years of literally thousands of textbooks and technical manuals I can attest to the actual publishing industry using AI on a daily basis in production editing.

I think as long as it isn't whole prompt generated (this can be checked using AI tools but its a much lower bar then obviously is being set at the moment on this site) it should be at the authors discretion to use of not use AI tools.

As things stand the bar is set way too strictly here and is causing massive numbers of false positives from real authors...and really good authors ...it's NOT ok

 

[DrPope]

@DrPope, you can take your toys and go home at anytime. This site was here before you, it'll get through this just fine.

I will take this as obvious evidence that you cannot debate or add anything to this discussion... years of food wasted is all I can say.

 

[DrPope]

How about we don't do this? Starting an argument isn't going to help one and completely devalues the conversation at hand

It was kind of my point..... but people who have nothing to contribute tend to chime in contributing nothing

 

[JordanGlover]

I tried contacting someone on this site for clarification on why stories are getting flagged for AI. I'm still waiting for a response, that was 6 weeks ago. I'm the first to admit I'm not the best writer but trying to improve. Even AFTER the story has been proofread by an editor and the recommended changes and STILL getting rejected is deflating.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I would suggest it is more like THOUSANDS of Overtly AI written stories rejected every week but the answer isn't to hurt obviously real authors ....giving established authors the benefit of the doubt would be a good start to minimizing collateral damage

Indeed, that's logical, once you've defined "obviously real authors" and "established".

I've always assumed that regular writers (those who publish steadily) get a set of notes against their name which say: content compliant; might push the line; dodgy as fuck, read every word; still can't spell - that kind of thing. So we go down queue A. I might be wrong about that, but I do get the sense that Laurel remembers regulars pretty well. At least us lot, here in the AH, but we're a tiny, tiny minority.

The problem occurs when someone is irregular, infrequent, last published a while ago, or only started writing this last year. You, for example: obviously no AI in 2010 when you published a few stories, but that doesn't get you a "good to go pass" now, because there's been a fourteen year gap, and you could have shares in the latest ChatGPT for all we know. So, queue B, start afresh, prove your credentials.

I will say, I'm a little mystified why some of the folk reporting in here are getting continuous knock-backs, yet get the occasional chapter through. That makes no sense to me. It's almost as if Laurel says, "I don't know any more on this guy. I'll pass it through, and let readers decide." Or it's an editorial pity fuck, who knows?

 

[RejectReality]

If anything was going to change — after months and months of threads — it would have. This is the way things are for the time being. You can beat your head against the wall as much as you want, but it's not going to change things. Meanwhile, the story you want to tell could be sailing through without issue elsewhere while you wait for the shitstorm to die down.

As to communicating, what's the point? The one and only thing Laurel could say that would appease anyone ( let alone everyone ) would be to drop the AI content restrictions entirely. If she laid out the whole process step by step, posted the numbers, the software, and explained her rationale, it doesn't change a damn thing for anyone who's getting rejected in error. The one and only thing it would accomplish is giving you guidance to change your writing to conform with the whims of ( highly ) questionable software that probably has a profit agenda. Meanwhile, it provides a roadmap for people to submit actual AI crapflap by tailoring their prompts to avoid exactly what the software is looking for.

Trying to work within the system to change the system only works when you have some form of power in the system.

You don't. The closest thing you have is voting with your feet.

My newest will start going in the queue this evening. If a part of it gets rejected for AI after resubmission, I'll pull any parts that have already gone up. Every story will have that same philosophy behind it. Meanwhile, it will be live and read elsewhere the whole time. I have no need to tilt at windmills.

 

[MillieDynamite]

No, I'm not debating with you, didn't intend to do so. I'm stating a fact, your wrong, this won't be the downfall of Lit. I didn't insult you, but you found it necessary to insult me.

I will take this as obvious evidence that you cannot debate or add anything to this discussion... years of food wasted is all I can say.

Portly, I feel for you're problem, I wasn't trying to discount it. I was responding to the idea that everyone is getting rejections. I also understand it doesn't help that don't highlight what the moderator considers to be AI like. It's hard for those of us who haven't had to deal with the problem to conceptualize the problem.

I've had five - waiting on a sixth - AI rejection for a part that has been edited over and over again. I've sent a DM to Laurel, I've resubmitted it with notes, I've done everything that's asked of me. It's been 40 days since it first got rejected and it's still sitting there and I don't have much hope in it ever going up.

Each rejection takes up to a week to process even though the story has been reviewed - I know because of the pending time being rest from the 4th, to the 5th.

I've done everything that's asked of me and yet here we are.

 

[DrPope]

Trying to work within the system to change the system only works when you have some form of power in the system.

You don't. The closest thing you have is voting with your feet.

My newest will start going in the queue this evening. If a part of it gets rejected for AI after resubmission, I'll pull any parts that have already gone up. Every story will have that same philosophy behind it. Meanwhile, it will be live and read elsewhere the whole time. I have no need to tilt at windmills.

It's sad and horrifying but I fear you may be right .... I also fear it is going to become a lot worse

 

[DrPope]

once you've defined "obviously real authors" and "established".

Anyone who has published prior to 2021 ...simple

Anything else hurts much more then it helps

 

[DrPope]

I'm stating a fact, your wrong, this won't be the downfall of Lit.

We shall see ....

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

Seems like all those other places are shutting down, meanwhile Lit is still publishing more stories than it did five, ten years ago, so the numbers don't quite support your argument.

What places are shutting down? All of them? I only know about ASSTR going away, and they are (or at least claim to be) working on a new site.

 

[ElectricBlue]

What places are shutting down? All of them? I only know about ASSTR going away, and they are (or at least claim to be) working on a new site.

ASSTR, Lot's Cave came to mind immediately. The point is, Literotica is the biggest site like this by a long shot, and all this forecasting of its demise seems a little premature to me.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

ASSTR, Lot's Cave came to mind immediately.

So... ASSTR, then. Because, as far as I remember, Lot's Cave was an ebook store. That's a completely different business model. And ONE other site is a far cry away from "all those other places".

The point is, Literotica is the biggest site like this by a long shot,

Not so sure about that one anymore.

and all this forecasting of its demise seems a little premature to me.

That I agree with.

 

[trevrepa]

In my opinion, the only way to solve this issue is for all authors who are struggling with AI rejection to run their stories through multiple AI detectors and post their results on this forum. Perhaps someone would like to start a new thread on this. If we all do this, within a week, I think it will be clear which AI detection software is being used. That will at least narrow it down so that we, as authors, can use that software, identify the troublesome areas of our stories, and make the necessary changes to get it passed. Personally, I think it is Sapling, as that site seems to hate my writing style, while I have no problem passing most other sites.

Here are the main AI detection sites I have used to run my stories through:

Undetectable
GTPZero
Writer
Crossplag
Copyleaks
Sapling
ContentatScale
ZerpGPT
ContentDetector
OpenAI

 

[Deleted member 6736302]

In my opinion, the only way to solve this issue is for all authors who are struggling with AI rejection to run their stories through multiple AI detectors and post their results on this forum. Perhaps someone would like to start a new thread on this. If we all do this, within a week, I think it will be clear which AI detection software is being used. That will at least narrow it down so that we, as authors, can use that software, identify the troublesome areas of our stories, and make the necessary changes to get it passed. Personally, I think it is Sapling, as that site seems to hate my writing style, while I have no problem passing most other sites.

Here are the main AI detection sites I have used to run my stories through:

Undetectable
GTPZero
Writer
Crossplag
Copyleaks
Sapling
ContentatScale
ZerpGPT
ContentDetector
OpenAI

I just chucked one of my rejected stories into Sapling at your suggestion.

For emphasis, I’ve used OpenAI previously to try and find AI material.

The latter had my rejected chapter at 17% AI.

Sapling by comparison has it at 99%. And the sentences it is highlighting are virtually every third person narrative sentence, which is entirely my style of writing.

I think there’s something in what you say.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I don't doubt your honesty, @Portly_Penguin; I never have. We assume that the same standard is applied to judge every story.

 

[DrPope]

nd they are (or at least claim to be) working on a new site.

it's complicated ... Asstr is a archive of usenet ...the collections stuff started years later. A new site is possible however there are a myriad of other factors that are muddying the waters

 

[EmilyMiller]

I just chucked one of my rejected stories into Sapling at your suggestion.

For emphasis, I’ve used OpenAI previously to try and find AI material.

The latter had my rejected chapter at 17% AI.

Sapling by comparison has it at 99%. And the sentences it is highlighting are virtually every third person narrative sentence, which is entirely my style of writing.

I think there’s something in what you say.

I put my latest story into Sapling, it truncated it to 2,000 characters (no way I’m paying for this). I got 0.0% fake.

My credential: https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector/a6d441c63a3cb54b60ed1c5b100fda39

 

[DrPope]

I think it is Sapling

You might be onto something ...I just put 4 stories I wrote between 1995 and 2005 and another one that is a chapter of a yet unpublished Kindle book in Sapling and got ....
Somewhere between 66% and 98% guess what it was highlighting????? Third person narrative mostly ... very interesting. And what a utter clusterfuck if this is true