Story rejected for AI - any suggestions

[wordbeast]

I recently had a 2nd part of a story rejected.(right under his nose pt 2). I believe the moderator is claiming it’s an AI story. It definitely is NOT an ai story. I spent a lot of time trying to proofread this submission because the first part of this story was rejected 5 times for grammatical errors.

I’m a new author here, and have successfully submitted four parts to a different series (Fashion Show 1-4). Have the rules to posting stories all of a sudden gotten more stringent on Literotica? Because going back over my first series, I myself can find multiple embarrassing grammatical errors in that series, yet it was posted with no issues.

So, I’m confused as how this moderator has determined that my story was generated by ai. And at this point what should I do? Any suggestions?

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

There have to be a dozen threads about this. Start by searching for them and reviewing the discussions

 

[NotWise]

I recently had a 2nd part of a story rejected.(right under his nose pt 2). I believe the moderator is claiming it’s an AI story. It definitely is NOT an ai story. I spent a lot of time trying to proofread this submission because the first part of this story was rejected 5 times for grammatical errors.

I’m a new author here, and have successfully submitted four parts to a different series (Fashion Show 1-4). Have the rules to posting stories all of a sudden gotten more stringent on Literotica? Because going back over my first series, I myself can find multiple embarrassing grammatical errors in that series, yet it was posted with no issues.

So, I’m confused as how this moderator has determined that my story was generated by ai. And at this point what should I do? Any suggestions?

There's nothing much we can do for you here. Please refer to AwkwardMDs AI Help Desk thread in the editor's forum.

 

[kokomoe1]

I'm not kidding when I say this, but add some typos and small grammatical errors to your story to help get past the AI check. This website seems to think writing in perfect grammar means it's AI, so adding a couple errors here and there will help them think it wasn't written by AI.

 

[SimonDoom]

I do NOT recommend deliberately adding grammatical mistake, because that makes your story worse, but you might consider going through your draft and changing things here and there to make the narrative voice or dialogue seem more human. Use contractions, for example. Make sure your characters talk like real people. Sending a note to Laurel with your next submission politely but firmly stating your case. Laurel is the only content moderator.

 

[FrancesScott]

@Laurel (the site co-owner and only, as far as we know, reviewer of stories) told me that the only thing that can help with rejected stories is reading the following. Sorry if that sounds blunt, it was in posted in response to me approaching her about AI work specifically. Good luck!

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/story-sent-back-please-read.1637742/

 

[OddLove]

I'm not kidding when I say this, but add some typos and small grammatical errors to your story to help get past the AI check. This website seems to think writing in perfect grammar means it's AI, so adding a couple errors here and there will help them think it wasn't written by AI.

That actually makes a lot of sense to me.

EDIT: Without full transparency on how the AI flagging system works, it could be worth a shot.

 

[iwatchus]

That actually makes a lot of sense to me.

EDIT: Without full transparency on how the AI flagging system works, it could be worth a shot.

DISCLAIMER: I have no idea what they use for a checker. My expectation is that it is a combination of an automated checker or checkers and a human review.

As a college professor, I think I have gotten pretty good at spotting AI generated essays. There is just an awkward structuring to them. I worry that we may occaionally flag ESL students unfairly, because they can display some of the same awkwardness (and have since before the availability of generative AI).

I do not think I could articulate clearly what that awkwardness is, but it is absolutely not a lack of typos or grammatical errors. That is a common mythos about AI generated vs human written text.

Because of the traditional cat and mouse games between cheaters and checkers, this sort of a situation is exactly why there cannot be complete transparency about how they check. If that is a bug, it is a bug in a much larger sense than just this site.

 

[kokomoe1]

DISCLAIMER: I have no idea what they use for a checker. My expectation is that it is a combination of an automated checker or checkers and a human review.

As a college professor, I think I have gotten pretty good at spotting AI generated essays. There is just an awkward structuring to them. I worry that we may occaionally flag ESL students unfairly, because they can display some of the same awkwardness (and have since before the availability of generative AI).

I do not think I could articulate clearly what that awkwardness is, but it is absolutely not a lack of typos or grammatical errors. That is a common mythos about AI generated vs human written text.

Because of the traditional cat and mouse games between cheaters and checkers, this sort of a situation is exactly why there cannot be complete transparency about how they check. If that is a bug, it is a bug in a much larger sense than just this site.

So they use AI to check if what you wrote was written by AI. Isn't the future amazing?

 

[AwkwardMD]

So they use AI to check if what you wrote was written by AI. Isn't the future amazing?

That is not what iwatchus said.

 

[NotWise]

So they use AI to check if what you wrote was written by AI. Isn't the future amazing?

If one AI decides that text is created by another AI, then you can get a third AI to make it more human.

 

[AwkwardMD]

If one AI decides that text is created by another AI, then you can get a third AI to make it more human.

When it comes to AI onky a triple negative can swing things around

 

[Britva415]

it's AI all the way down

 

[Voboy]

DISCLAIMER: I have no idea what they use for a checker. My expectation is that it is a combination of an automated checker or checkers and a human review.

As a college professor, I think I have gotten pretty good at spotting AI generated essays. There is just an awkward structuring to them. I worry that we may occaionally flag ESL students unfairly, because they can display some of the same awkwardness (and have since before the availability of generative AI).

I do not think I could articulate clearly what that awkwardness is, but it is absolutely not a lack of typos or grammatical errors. That is a common mythos about AI generated vs human written text.

Because of the traditional cat and mouse games between cheaters and checkers, this sort of a situation is exactly why there cannot be complete transparency about how they check. If that is a bug, it is a bug in a much larger sense than just this site.

"Stilted" is the term I would use. I agree that you develop a knack for spotting it.

I generally take work that shows that stilted quality and call the writer in to ask a few pointed questions about what they wrote. It's very easy to determine whether it's a false positive, though it is time-consuming.

 

[gunhilltrain]

it's AI all the way down

It's slowly but surely a losing battle, even though I don't like the way it's going. It reminds me of the failed efforts to "get people out of their cars" and onto streetcars or trains or whatever. That has been a long-standing goal of "city planning" for decades. But the War on Cars is based on illusory thinking. Autos went from near a zero percentage of American urban transport in 1905 to nearly half by 1925, a century ago. It's like having a war on cell phones or the Internet.

https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.ne...BqkRQr_CRGYIlV81YxL-YPyRGiS9b-Ltg&oe=68AC21D2

 

[Angelk46]

@Laurel (the site co-owner and only, as far as we know, reviewer of stories) told me that the only thing that can help with rejected stories is reading the following. Sorry if that sounds blunt, it was in posted in response to me approaching her about AI work specifically. Good luck!

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/story-sent-back-please-read.1637742/

All of mine are getting rejected

 

[RejectReality]

One of the biggest issues I have is that all these new authors testing the waters for the first time ( especially the younger ones ) have been bombarded with AI slop for years at this point. Most of the news articles, social media posts, youtube videos, and everything else are being written or "enhanced" by AI. It's been normalized. It's what they're seeing every day. Without a single "enhancement" tool, they're turning out writing that emulates it to at least some degree, the same way pretty much all of us did with what we read.

Cockblocking them before they can put anything in front of an audience means they're never going to get the feedback we all got to learn from. ( I know truly useful feedback is few and far between, but still... ) You can toss terminology at them all day. It doesn't mean they're going to get where you're coming from. They've got every right to be pissed when they're being accused of using AI to write their story when they haven't. No matter what that rejection says about editing tools, the gut reaction is that Lit is accusing them of putting in a prompt that says "write a threesome fuck story" and then submitting what it vomited out.

It's painfully obvious that the queue is being overrun with AI slop. Laurel didn't come right out and say it the last time I talked to her, but she indirectly addressed my complaining by agreeing that AI detectors suck, but adding that AI stories suck. That screams that she's being bombarded with the pure slop. When someone throws open the sewer gate, you've got to do something to filter out the turds, and the only thing available right now is nets that are naturally going to snag stuff it wasn't meant to.

Okay, not a great analogy. Pretty much nothing solid you wouldn't want to snag out of sewer water, but you get the point. LOL

I get it. I still think it's erring too far in the wrong direction and chasing off the new blood that's the future of the site. I doubt I'd be making a risky bet by saying that most of us here are over the hill, at best. We're going to start dropping like flies in a few years, and if the n00bs have all given up, the site withers and dies with us at some point.

My best suggestion is to cultivate multiple venues. Most of the other erotica sites aren't policing AI as aggressively as Lit is. You at least won't have that hurdle. Get in front of readers, and mine those precious nuggets of feedback and data. Lit's always going to have the biggest audience, but it doesn't mean shit if the story can't be published here. If one gets rejected for AI, write it off and take it elsewhere. Maybe with a little feedback, you can figure out what's dry and stilted in your writing from all the AI you've been exposed to, and get a few more past the hallucinating clanker onto Lit as well.

It's a good practice in general as well. Different rules and readerships means whatever your imagination comes up with, you can probably find a home for on one or more sites if you don't limit yourself to one. Putting yourself in a box stifles creativity.