AwkwardMD AI Rejection Help Desk

[SkyBubble]

It seems, given the patterns of stories we hear, that the first rejection happens because of automated criteria (read: the AI detector) and that subsequent submissions with a note (like yours) will sit in the pending queue until she can take a look at the work.

If she rejects it again, the step after that is to enlist the aid of a volunteer editor from the site (read: Literotica's Volunteer Editor Program from this Editors Forum, not just anyone who can do editing work) and try to get one of them to vouch for you, using the evidence you have.

This from the rejection notice: "Please see this FAQ for more information: https://literotica.com/faq/publishing/publishing-ai NOTE: the sentence at the end of this response [[Please feel free to re-submit the story after a Volunteer Editor has examined it, or after you've made revisions.]] does not apply to stories rejected for content or AI issues. Volunteer Editors can help only with grammar, punctuation, and story mechanics issues and are not equipped to deal with AI issues. You may resubmit after you’ve made revisions."

 

[AwkwardMD]

@SkyBubble Yes. Two people are saying different things. You have correctly identified a gap.

 

[SkyBubble]

@SkyBubble Yes. Two people are saying different things. You have correctly identified a gap.

@dmallord is quoting Lit, however.

 

[AwkwardMD]

@dmallord is quoting Lit, however.

Feel free to go and get help from any of the other users volunteering their time to help anyone with an AI rejection.

 

[SkyBubble]

The point of putting those two quotes together isthat what you said is contradicted by what @dmallord posted, which comes from Lit itself.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Okay

 

[GLawrence]

Thank you, Awkard, for the information. It's helps to know the defective "AI" detector is also blocking other authors, so this is just a screw up and not something personal.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Thank you, Awkard, for the information. It's helps to know the defective "AI" detector is also blocking other authors, so this is just a screw up and not something personal.

It's never something personal, it's always a cock up of some sort.

The site doesn't know you, your story is one of hundreds each day on the conveyor belt. There's absolutely no reason to think the site editor is going to zoom in on any individual and say, I don't like you, I'm not going to process your story.

 

[dmallord]

Well, that didn't take long. I submitted the rewrite, the See Dick, See Sally version, on the 18th, and it was posted early on the 21st, around 2 am according to the timeline. That's much faster than usual for Lit to handle resubmissions, I think.

Awk, I did add the explanation that it was my own writing and not substantially generated by AI. I also stated that I used Grammarly for spelling, punctuation, and some verb tense agreement.

So far, I have three likes and one new follower. It has some formatting errors. I forgot to allow for extra spaces when using an italic font that jams things together. But let's see how others view it.

Edit: The rejection was a month ago. It took me a while to get it revised and back to Lit. Attn & FYI regarding posting success: @da804 and @SkyBubble

 

[Nexii]

So I can understand my first practice story per site rules being sent back. I had AI write a draft which I poured a ton of time into editing and re-prompting. Honestly, the entire first story would have taken less time for me to write from scratch on my own.

The second story was my own draft filtered through AI for minor edits (style/structure). It reads and flows much better than most of the slop on this site. A little fast-paced, perhaps, but very original characters, setting, world, etc. Also sent back.

I've since put countless hours into a third story which I'm not going to even bother trying to get through this site's filters.

Let's be real here. What is going to turn out better? A 100% human written story done in an hour or two, or one that's 90% human, 10% AI used purely as a copy editor, that you put 100+ hours into?

 

[ElectricBlue]

Let's be real here. What is going to turn out better? A 100% human written story done in an hour or two, or one that's 90% human, 10% AI used purely as a copy editor, that you put 100+ hours into?

You're learning the hard way, no AI means no use of AI at all, on this site.

If your third story is completely yours, with no copy editor used except the most basic (not Grammarly or similar), then you shouldn't give up so quickly. If you do submit, and it gets another rejection, that's when you choose not to use the site. To do so beforehand, based on two acknowledged AI rejections, is tossing out the baby in the bathwater.

If I was you, I'd submit the third story, if as you say you've bled blood with it.

 

[AwkwardMD]

So I can understand my first practice story per site rules being sent back. I had AI write a draft which I poured a ton of time into editing and re-prompting. Honestly, the entire first story would have taken less time for me to write from scratch on my own.

The second story was my own draft filtered through AI for minor edits (style/structure). It reads and flows much better than most of the slop on this site. A little fast-paced, perhaps, but very original characters, setting, world, etc. Also sent back.

I've since put countless hours into a third story which I'm not going to even bother trying to get through this site's filters.

Let's be real here. What is going to turn out better? A 100% human written story done in an hour or two, or one that's 90% human, 10% AI used purely as a copy editor, that you put 100+ hours into?

"Better" is not the point. "Human" is the point.

 

[Nexii]

Ok if better isn't the point then this site just isn't for me. A story is not a one-on-one roleplay. And there's a certain hypocrisy to using AI to filter for AI.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Ok if better isn't the point then this site just isn't for me. A story is not a one-on-one roleplay. And there's a certain hypocrisy to using AI to filter for AI.

Lit's AI detector is not driven by capital a capital i artificial intelligence. It's as complex as a calculator. I'm not sure how roleplay factors into that, but I would agree that a story is not one-on-one roleplay and that this isn't even a controversial take.

 

[PennyThompson]

Ok if better isn't the point then this site just isn't for me.

Well, I might suggest that you're creating a false binary by comparing "2 hours of human writing" with "100+ hours of human and AI."

When a story site allows AI, what they inevitably end up with is an endless tide of Close-to-Zero-Effort AI slop content. I don't know of any site that allows AI "but only if you're special and really really care about your story."

You could also spend 100+ hours of your own effort on a story you care about without using AI