Another AI Rejection Post (5/30 Update)

[Thanatos_X13]

UPDATE 5/30/24
My previously rejected work is now pending publication for tomorrow! For over a month I've been dealing with this, so I am very happy to have finally succeeded in getting approved. I know that the AI rejection conversation is frustrating for a lot of you who aren't experiencing this. My hope is that by sharing what I did it gives insight into what's happening and what others can do if they get an AI rejection. By no means is this meant to be a comprehensive guide. This is just my experience, and others' may differ. I am also not putting this out there so that bad actors can circumvent detection. I just know from seeing other new writers that there are some of us who are trying everything to get approved and getting denied again and again (one person said he was denied 13! times).

So, that said, here's what I did.

• My work is already 100% human written. If someone is using any kind of assist tool beyond a basic spell check, maybe stop doing that.
• I ran my work through every single free online AI detector available to get an idea of what in my work might be tripping the sensor.
• Changed basic, simple sentences to be more specific or colorful. Example: I changed "She didn't have time for [her friends]" to "She couldn't spare a second for them."
• Used a lot more metaphorical language. Example: "He grunted and snorted like a pot-bellied pig." Or added vivid, descriptive words that aren't commonly used, such as "opalescent."
• Rewrote dialogue to be more informal by removing unnecessary nouns and verbs. Added more unusual contractions. Example: "What're" instead of "What are." Also made dialogue more colorful where possible.
• Paid closer attention to varying sentence length and structure. I have a problem with always wanting to write long, multi-clause sentences.
• Broke up or rewrote simple sentences joined by ", and" because that seemed to get flagged by the AI detectors a lot.
• Disrespected the rules of grammar. Inserted tons of incomplete clauses and sentences where it made sense. Turned full sentences into fragments to convey the same information. Improperly using the -ing form of a verb. Example: "Clamping his lips over her nipple, sucking it hard before gently raking his teeth across the stiff bud."
• (EDIT: 6/4/24) Included an admin note in the my submission thanking them for their time, asserting that I do not use AI, and explaining a bit of my writing and revision process. I don't know how much it helps, but I am sure it helps some. Also, I genuinely believe a little kindness goes a long way, at the very least.

The big things seemed to be, write colorfully, break grammar rules often, and don't overuse common or cliche phrases.

I genuinely hope this helps, and I hope this is the last I'll speak on this subject. I've got a lot more stories I want to put out, so I'm hoping to not have to go through all this for every single one.

================
UPDATE 5/10/24
Welp, 14 days after resubmitting, I am not surprised to have been rejected for AI again. Per their message, Literotica checked my story multiple times and it came back as the majority was written by AI. I honestly don't have the words to express the sheer absurdity of having a machine tell a human that their work was created by another machine - machines that have stolen our work in the first place. "We stole everything humanity has ever written and now we get to claim you're copying our homework."

So, again, I have basically no recourse. There is no way for me to convince them that my work is my own. Their suggestion is to work with an editor, but since the editors have no idea what's being flagged as AI either, how is that supposed to make a difference? Not to mention, this is not some paid gig. We all do this for free. I'll go through extra effort when submitting my non-erotic works to paying mags, but turning my fun side hobby into a massive chore just to try and circumvent an AI from falsely identifying my work as also being AI is not worth it. My work is at least as good as most other works here, and was good enough to get published the 1st time around. I'm not being rejected on quality or merit, but by the theft-robot.

I have yet to decide what I'll do next, but I am leaning towards just packing it up and saying fuck this place.

Also, if you're curious and want to judge for yourself, here's my 1st chapter, written in exactly the same style: https://literotica.com/s/immoral-counseling-ch-01

================
ORIGINAL POST

I read through several other threads on this topic before posting, but I am no closer to figuring out what to do.

After a 15 year hiatus, I decided to start publishing here again. My 1st new work was approved and published without issue, so I submitted the next chapter. Today, 11 days later, I get a rejection for AI. I don't use AI, I don't use Grammarly or anything other than Word and my typing fingers. I've got a BA in English, I've never used a grammar checking program in my life. I write the way I write. My style is my style. The "conventional wisdom" I've read around the forums seems to be A) stop using Grammarly and B) become a better writer, whatever that means. And that "How to Avoid AI Rejection" thread didn't help me either. I don't know what in my work is getting flagged, and I'm not about to play blindfolded whack-a-mole with my sentences. So, I'm at a loss.

Out of curiosity, I used three different free AI checker tools on my work. Two said my work was written by a human, and one said that 34% was AI. So, I added the word "motherfucking" to every sentence that was flagged, and oh, gee, now it's all written by a human. Here's a fun example: "The next day, Lacy was in a rush to get out of her 6th period class." is a sentence that a human definitely didn't write, but "The next motherfucking day, Lacy was in a rush to get out of her 6th period class." is definitely written by a human. I know these aren't the tools that Laurel uses, so it isn't particularly helpful, but it is frustrating to me that these programs detect AI when a basic, natural sentence is used. Here's another good one: "Let's help each other out" was written by an AI, but only a human could write "Shan’t we assist one another in jolly cooperation, my lady?" Maybe I need to write all my stories while role-playing as Solaire from Dark Souls.

So, authors who have more experience with this, hopefully you can help me figure out what to do. Do I resubmit as-is with a note to the admin? Do I try to DM Laurel through the forums? I've got 8 chapters of this story written with 8 more planned, and I'd just really like to get them all published.

 

[KeithD]

The "conventional wisdom" I've read around the forums seems to be A) stop using Grammarly and B) become a better writer, whatever that means.

I like to think that the conventional wisdom on this is to either message Laurel directly with the case that you haven't used any AI with it or to refile with that noted in the notes box (or both). It's what I'll do when/if I get such a rejection.

 

[AG31]

I read through several other threads on this topic before posting, but I am no closer to figuring out what to do.

After a 15 year hiatus, I decided to start publishing here again. My 1st new work was approved and published without issue, so I submitted the next chapter. Today, 11 days later, I get a rejection for AI. I don't use AI, I don't use Grammarly or anything other than Word and my typing fingers. I've got a BA in English, I've never used a grammar checking program in my life. I write the way I write. My style is my style. The "conventional wisdom" I've read around the forums seems to be A) stop using Grammarly and B) become a better writer, whatever that means. And that "How to Avoid AI Rejection" thread didn't help me either. I don't know what in my work is getting flagged, and I'm not about to play blindfolded whack-a-mole with my sentences. So, I'm at a loss.

Out of curiosity, I used three different free AI checker tools on my work. Two said my work was written by a human, and one said that 34% was AI. So, I added the word "motherfucking" to every sentence that was flagged, and oh, gee, now it's all written by a human. Here's a fun example: "The next day, Lacy was in a rush to get out of her 6th period class." is a sentence that a human definitely didn't write, but "The next motherfucking day, Lacy was in a rush to get out of her 6th period class." is definitely written by a human. I know these aren't the tools that Laurel uses, so it isn't particularly helpful, but it is frustrating to me that these programs detect AI when a basic, natural sentence is used. Here's another good one: "Let's help each other out" was written by an AI, but only a human could write "Shan’t we assist one another in jolly cooperation, my lady?" Maybe I need to write all my stories while role-playing as Solaire from Dark Souls.

So, authors who have more experience with this, hopefully you can help me figure out what to do. Do I resubmit as-is with a note to the admin? Do I try to DM Laurel through the forums? I've got 8 chapters of this story written with 8 more planned, and I'd just really like to get them all published.

When you contact Laurel, include the information you have here in your post. Maybe trimmed down to the essentials of what the two AI "detectors" found, and how you solved it with "motherfucking."

 

[mildlyaroused]

Frankly, online AI checkers are all shams. Don't use them as a metric to judge how your story will be flagged on Lit (or in any other publication with a reputable system behind it).

 

[nice90sguy]

I'm not a motherfucking bot. I motherfucking promise you. There's no motherfucking way that my motherfucking style of writing could be written by a motherfucking AI.

 

[nice90sguy]

I read through several other threads on this topic before posting, but I am no closer to figuring out what to do.

The "conventional wisdom" I've read around the forums seems to be A) stop using Grammarly and B) become a better writer, whatever that means. And that "How to Avoid AI Rejection" thread didn't help me either. I don't know what in my work is getting flagged, and I'm not about to play blindfolded whack-a-mole with my sentences. So, I'm at a loss.

The threads are so long, you probably missed the most salient point: If your natural writing style looks as though it could have been written by AI, that's a cause for rejection. The rejection is not so much about actually using AI tools, than a story having a writing style that looks like AI-assisted or AI- generated writing.
Your options are:

1) to change your writing style so that it's less "AI-like". There are a number of suggestions in the threads about what may be triggering the detector. Check some of Bramblethorn's posts about it. No need to add spurious expletives everywhere, but I get why you may have resorted to that in your exapseration!

2) Argue with the site, but don't change your style -- works sometimes, particualarly with established writers here

3) Shrug, and post your story elsewhere -- galling and frustrating, I know.

1) Is MUCH easier to do than you think, and I recommend follwing the advice in the threads about how to do it. I think a lot of writers are a bit too precisous about "their" style. Most writers' styles will change over time anyway.

 

[TheLobster]

my motherfucking style of writing

Okay but what about your style of writing outside of mother/son stories?

 

[AwkwardlySet]

And I was getting worried about the lack of AI threads lately. The short response is: The AI is a true motherfucker () of a problem and Lit doesn't have a clue how to deal with it. There are no guidelines besides not using the advanced Grammarly features, and some good-natured but ultimately BS advice to change your writing style so some hack AI-detection tool that Laurel uses wouldn't flag your content. The best you can do is to PM Laurel and explain your case. Be patient and persistent, although there is a high likelihood that you will be completely ignored. It sucks, but it is what it is, and it is unlikely to change in the near future, judging by the past several months of AI hell.

 

[ElectricBlue]

And I was getting worried about the lack of AI threads lately.

Maybe the drop off in threads means the site is getting on top of the problem, and fewer stories are getting bounced. Did you think of that?

 

[TheLobster]

Maybe the drop off in threads means the site is getting on top of the problem, and fewer stories are getting bounced. Did you think of that?

Or perhaps people are getting rejected and (eventually) giving up, not bothering to complain about it on the forums. It's pretty much impossible to tell, and it's one of the many unknowns about the whole issue.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Or perhaps people are getting rejected and (eventually) giving up, not bothering to complain about it on the forums. It's pretty much impossible to tell, and it's one of the many unknowns about the whole issue.

In my experience with complaints, the noise is proportional to the problem. I see no reason why people would suddenly change their behaviour and not complain, if the rejection problem was still tracking at the same level.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Maybe the drop off in threads means the site is getting on top of the problem, and fewer stories are getting bounced. Did you think of that?

That would mean Lit competently and systemically resolving issues, which kinda goes against all my experience on this website. But did you think of a different reason? Maybe people realized that posting and complaining on the forum about AI-related problems leads nowhere. Maybe people are tired of the responses such as: "Write better" or "Don't write like a machine" or "Your style sucks" etc.

 

[StillStunned]

Maybe people are tired of the responses such as: "Write better" or "Don't write like a machine" or "Your style sucks" etc.

I think the most frequent response was actually, "Sorry, we know just as little as you do."

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I think the most frequent response was actually, "Sorry, we know just as little as you do."

I agree. Most people wanted to be helpful and understanding. But there were some people who came on with a sense of superiority, giving arrogant advice on how to write better, etc. Authors are generally sensitive about their writing, so when they are in such a frustrating situation, such an attitude can overwhelm all the other helpful and well-meaning advice.
To make myself clear, I have no idea why there aren't as many AI threads as before. Nobody does. So my guess is at least as good as EB's.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Maybe the drop off in threads means the site is getting on top of the problem, and fewer stories are getting bounced. Did you think of that?

I've speculated that the opposite is or may already be happening. In a post elsewhere I wrote: "I'm beginning to think that his battle against AI is a losing rear-guard action. Someday the world may be a version of Blade Runner where there will be no way to be sure what is human and what is technology. It probably will be just as disharmonious as the world we are in today."

That may continue unless something like an EMP attack or a solar flare fries most things electric or electronic and we're back in the 18th Century, at least. In that situation, there certainly will be no on-line publishing of anything because "on-line" won't exist any longer.

 

[Thanatos_X13]

I appreciate all the responses here, even the jokey ones and the sorta off topic ones. Sorry, the MOTHERFUCKING off topic ones! XD

Seems like my only real recourse is to resubmit and add a note and hope for the best. I'm gonna take this as an opportunity to go back and revise the chapter just for my own satisfaction, and who knows, maybe that helps, too. As I stated in the opening, frankly, trying to change how I write to somehow avoid being falsely accused of using AI is pointless. I have no idea what is being flagged and changing my style to write like someone I am not defeats the purpose. I don't pretend to be a great writer, but if I'm going to publish anything to this site, it's going to be my work and my words and my voice.

I guess I'll update here with how it turns out. If nothing else, maybe it'll help someone else down the line.

 

[ElectricBlue]

That would mean Lit competently and systemically resolving issues, which kinda goes against all my experience on this website. But did you think of a different reason? Maybe people realized that posting and complaining on the forum about AI-related problems leads nowhere. Maybe people are tired of the responses such as: "Write better" or "Don't write like a machine" or "Your style sucks" etc.

Yes, i did. I thought the reason might be, "Gee, look, the number of complaints have dropped off, I wonder if they're getting on top of the problem?"

Your default is to criticise the site, my default is to say, i do okay by this publishing platform for which I pay nothing. If the site causes you so much grief, why are you still here?

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Yes, i did. I thought the reason might be, "Gee, look, the number of complaints have dropped off, I wonder if they're getting on top of the problem?"

Your default is to criticise the site, my default is to say, i do okay by this publishing platform for which I pay nothing. If the site causes you so much grief, why are you still here?

First of all, I only made a joke in my first post. I made no assumptions as to why there weren't as many AI topics as before. It's only when you came up with an assumption that I replied with an assumption of my own. Both are equally unverifiable.

Contrary to your belief, my default isn't to criticize but to present things in a balanced way. The reason why I am most often the voice of criticism is because there are so many people here such as yourself who have nothing but praise and gratitude towards Lit, always, even in the cases where some criticism is warranted. Now, if I thought people here were criticizing Lit too much, I would try to balance such criticism with some praise of my own, but that is unlikely to happen unless the time I've spent here has been a very uncharacteristic period for AH. I believe in a balanced approach, that's all. That being said, I am not always criticizing Lit, even if those who do criticize are such a stark minority here.

As to your last question - Is my presence here bothering you so much? Am I causing you acid reflux? Are you one of those guys who tell people to emigrate if they dislike the government and the way the country is being run?
To answer your question, my experience on Lit has been mostly a mixed bag. Some good and some bad. So by pointing out the things that could and should be better, I am trying to improve my own, but also the experience of other authors. That is why I criticize.

 

[ElectricBlue]

First of all, I only made a joke in my first post. I made no assumptions as to why there weren't as many AI topics as before. It's only when you came up with an assumption that I replied with an assumption of my own. Both are equally unverifiable.

Contrary to your belief, my default isn't to criticize but to present things in a balanced way. The reason why I am most often the voice of criticism is because there are so many people here such as yourself who have nothing but praise and gratitude towards Lit, always, even in the cases where some criticism is warranted.

Fair enough. You strike me as mostly negative, though, maybe not as balanced as you think you are. But then, I get what I pay for here, and don't see all the negatives others do. I guess I'm a half full glass kind of guy, and learned long ago not to waste energy on things I have no control over.

As I say to Simon, carry on!

 

[MrCurrie]

[No personal attacks or trolling - including creating accounts for this specific purpose. Heated discussions are fine, even welcome. However, personally attacking / kink-shaming a fellow author or reader is not allowed within the Author's Hangout. Threads which devolve into the exchanging of insults will be closed and repeat offenders will be given a timeout, per the AH rules.]

 

[intim8]

Or perhaps people are getting rejected and (eventually) giving up, not bothering to complain about it on the forums. It's pretty much impossible to tell, and it's one of the many unknowns about the whole issue.

That would imply that it's the same writers, not some random-ish thing. In which case, maybe it is their writing style? That's both encouraging (selfishly) and a bit terrifying (big picture wise)

I see no reason why people would suddenly change their behaviour and not complain, if the rejection problem was still tracking at the same level.

Same reason the OP felt the need to apologize. There's only so many ways to discuss the problem, and with radio silence from above and no visible progress, resignation and fatigue sets in.

 

[Jmanchu]

I'm not a motherfucking bot. I motherfucking promise you. There's no motherfucking way that my motherfucking style of writing could be written by a motherfucking AI.

*Samuel L Jackson voice* I've had it with these motha'fuckin' AI's on this motha'fucking story.

 

[amenarimix]

The problem is they're using it the wrong way. AI writes like a human, not an alien. So, if you're good at writing, you'll be flagged most of the time. It's disgusting when they say my trashy writing is AI-written. You shouldn't use an AI detector here in the first place. To sort out bad stories, you need to read them yourself. If I use AI to write a story, then my stories will be so much better due to a good writing style. It still makes no sense who brought this idea. I mean, AI writes like us. We train them to write like this. They didn't innovate it, duh.

 

[Britva415]

Seems like my only real recourse is to resubmit and add a note and hope for the best

Sure, but when you do, don't ignore the advice to address this matter in your Notes to Laurel. Spell it out to her and show her you read the rejection notes and are responding to that.

 

[alohadave]

The problem is they're using it the wrong way. AI writes like a human, not an alien. So, if you're good at writing, you'll be flagged most of the time. It's disgusting when they say my trashy writing is AI-written. You shouldn't use an AI detector here in the first place. To sort out bad stories, you need to read them yourself. If I use AI to write a story, then my stories will be so much better due to a good writing style. It still makes no sense who brought this idea. I mean, AI writes like us. We train them to write like this. They didn't innovate it, duh.

If you think all that, you haven't actually tried to use AI to write.