This is why we can’t have nice things

[AwkwardMD]

Okay

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

Please delete or redact your post.

If the site owners or mods feel this thread is out of bounds they know what to do.

 

[Britva415]

I’m going to show you how sensitive Lit’s AI detector really is. So if your story’s in Pending Purgatory, read on.

I've seen a couple of instances where after a permanently-pending reset, subsequently the story is rejected for suspected AI. Yours is one of them. However, the vast majority of permanently-pending-and-then-reset stories aren't rejected for AI. At least among the cases I've seen people report in the AH, they just get approved. So I'm not remotely convinced that the permanently-pending bug has anything at all to do with AI "detection". I know your experience is very personal and probably visceral, but it doesn't match that of most people who have been reporting their results about re-submitting, here.

If your timer resets, you’ve been flagged: for spelling, formatting, banned tags (don’t use “death”), requested edits, or possible AI content.

Again, this doesn't match the majority of permanent-pending-followed-by-resubmit experiences people have been reporting here in the AH. If this were true, then, there wouldn't be any rapid approvals following resubmit, but that's mostly (not entirely, but mostly) what people say is happening.

You did hypothesize that if you weren't wrong, then, only "luck" would explain things, but, I think you're wrong and I think that luck, good or bad, is in fact the explanation.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Since we do not know how the use of AI is estimated, or what is used to determine if AI might've or mightn't've been used, any system can be used to Dee-AI a story. But if they use random chunks of stories to test, one must find all random chunks that have AI similarities to ensure the passage of a story. This whole thread seems a pointless exercise and only brings you're stories under more scrutiny by the powers that be. I agree with the others, for your own sake, delete your comments.

 

[AwkwardMD]

If the site owners or mods feel this thread is out of bounds they know what to do.

I don't know how getting a solid author's catalog nuked helps anyone.

 

[AwkwardMD]

The only thing that's gonna do is reinforce a persecution complex. Nobody walks away from that wanting to improve communication, or improve understanding. It's just petulance on top of petulance.

I don't know where you got the idea that I'm just a Good Samaritan who doesn't really know anything. Whoever told you that lied to you. I don’t have official qualifications, but every time a thread like this comes up it just reinforces that I was right the whole time.

I have helped several users get their work posted and I could have helped you too, but if you persist in setting things on fire they will burn.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I don't know how getting a solid author's catalog nuked helps anyone.

I don't think that's what Jackie was suggesting?

 

[SugarStorm]

The only thing that's gonna do is reinforce a persecution complex. Nobody walks away from that wanting to improve communication, or improve understanding. It's just petulance on top of petulance.

I admit I’m a bit confused reading your post — I’m not entirely sure who you’re replying to, but if it’s directed at me, I’m sorry; I just don’t get it.

I don't know where you got the idea that I'm just a Good Samaritan who doesn't really know anything. Whoever told you that lied to you. I don’t have official qualifications, but every time a thread like this comes up it just reinforces that I was right the whole time.

I have helped several users get their work posted and I could have helped you too, but if you persist in setting things on fire they will burn.

You seem to be taking this quite personally, and if my tone has read as condescending or rude, that truly wasn’t my intention. That’s not me. I was just trying to share what I’d found and how I interpreted it.

When I used the term “Good Samaritan,” I genuinely meant it as a compliment — someone kind and supportive who helps others out of goodwill. I had no idea it implied that you don’t know anything.

I mean, nobody’s told me that you don’t know anything; quite the opposite. I respect your experience and have even reached out to you for advice in the past, twice even. You didn't like my stories very much, but I was happy to take in what you taught me.

I just happen to disagree with you on this topic.

I also want to say that I’m not the one who keeps bringing this topic up to the front page. If I’m so clearly wrong, just let the thread die. In a day or two nobody will remember this, and we can find something else to argue about.

I stilli think we should remove anonymous voting.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I admit I’m a bit confused reading your post — I’m not entirely sure who you’re replying to, but if it’s directed at me, I’m sorry; I just don’t get it.

I'm trying to convince you not to be cavalier about how the site might see your attempts to inform.

You seem to be taking this quite personally, and if my tone has read as condescending or rude, that truly wasn’t my intention. That’s not me. I was just trying to share what I’d found and how I interpreted it.

I am exasperated, because I see these patterns repeating themselves and I see why it's happening, but between Literotica's silence and the indignation of users I can't always help I don't know what more to do.

When I used the term “Good Samaritan,” I genuinely meant it as a compliment — someone kind and supportive who helps others out of goodwill. I had no idea it implied that you don’t know anything.

Then I unfairly lumped you in with some other users who also don't listen to me, and who sling mud at Lit regularly. I love this site. It means a lot to me, and I'm heartbroken watching bugs and glitches demoralize so many users.

I mean, nobody’s told me that you don’t know anything; quite the opposite. I respect your experience and have even reached out to you for advice in the post, twice even. You didn't like my stories very much, but I was happy to take in what you taught me.

I just happen to disagree with you on this topic.

Then I apologize. I made incorrect assumptions.

I also want to say that I’m not the one who keeps bringing this topic up to the front page. If I’m so clearly wrong, just let the thread die. In a day or two nobody will remember this, and we can find something else to argue about.

I stilli think we should remove anonymous voting.

I can only respond to the ones I spot, and I respond to a lot of them. Some users are on my ignore list, though, so I can't get them all.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Instead of further indignancy, I would like the opportunity to help you if the need arises

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Good for you @SugarStorm for solving your problem. It's a shame you had to do all those things to be approved.

We are all on the same side here, so there's no need for gatekeeping on this subject, regardless of good intentions. The same powers that decide everything can decide if SugarStorm overstepped.
We are not on opposing sides here.

 

[onehitwanda]

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

View attachment 2577006

I love that show.

 

[onehitwanda]

I love that show.

I love Villanelle, and I feel very much like her right now.