The AI Rejection Conversation Matters

[lustychimera]

I was taught to avoid passive voice back in the day, and would have changed it if I saw it first. Grammarly is just making it easier for me to see. Would I have caught it without AI on successive read throughs? Maybe, maybe not, but it is my choice to make the change, not some AI.

Why is it anything to "catch," though? When you were writing and in the moment, you clearly thought passive voice expressed it best, so why change it?

And it's not really you making the decision if you're only making it to adhere to an (IMO) inapplicable ruleset tailored toward writing essays and simple prose rather than a creative expression.

There's nothing wrong with passive voice. Maybe think about specifically why you're making all those changes like that, what effect it has on the story. And not just for the AI thing but to help find a solid voice.

I agree the spellcheck is fine, but the issue with grammar checks is that grammar is the actual syntax. That's the expression of your words itself. It's not comparable to changing the spelling, which is a binary, yes, it's right, or no, it's not.

Even punctuation. Does that dependent clause really need a comma? What's that do to the pacing, the clarity? Things like that.

 

[scbolder]

In one of Flannery O'Connors's letters, I don't remember to whom, there is a one-sentence paragraph imitating a teenager who worked for. It is 250 words long, and you're out of breath by the time you get through it, just like the girl was, and whoever listened to her ramble from one subject to another, rushing through the words as they formed in her head. Of course, Grammarly or ProWritingAid would hate it, but I loved it. It was how teenagers often talk.

That's a reality of life, and AI can't do that right.

Neither can I . . . at least not yet , although I am not sure I want to

I know I have a lot to improve on, and honestly my goal is just to be able to write engaging stories that people enjoy. I am not aiming to write great prose or win awards or create some great unique style. Right now, I just want to be able to publish my stories and not be judge by some AI that thinks I am one of it's own.

 

[scbolder]

Why is it anything to "catch," though? When you were writing and in the moment, you clearly thought passive voice expressed it best, so why change it?

I get that, and you are probably right, but to answer your question, it is because way back in high school I had it drilled into my head over and over that passive voice was bad in writing. This continued in my early professional career. Ironically, those same teachers are what made me stay away from creative writing for over 20 years since. Still, I find it hard to shake those "rules" even if my flow state writing avoids them. It is definitely something to focus on moving forward.

And it's not really you making the decision if you're only making it to adhere to an (IMO) inapplicable ruleset tailored toward writing essays and simple prose rather than a creative expression.

That's fair, but I've never studied creative writing, so I only practiced what was desired in my field and that was definitely simple. Before publishing to Lit in 2020 the last piece of fiction I wrote was probably when I was 10. So, trying to learn it at this point is a slow process. I have decades of experience pulling me towards more formal "essay" or technical writing, so AI input or not, that's how I write, or more accurately, edit.

I agree the spellcheck is fine, but the issue with grammar checks is that grammar is the actual syntax. That's the expression of your words itself. It's not comparable to changing the spelling, which is a binary, yes, it's right, or no, it's not.

I agree, but this is where my writing background conflicts with creative writing. When I edit my work it is still with a formal style in mind. There are right and wrong grammar choices. I get this does not translate to creative writing, but it is hard to avoid when I edit. Hell, it took me a while to be okay (I'm still not great) at writing contractions in dialogue as traditionally I never use them in writing.

Hopefully, now that I am more conscious of the need to write me "freely," I will do better.

Even punctuation. Does that dependent clause really need a comma? What's that do to the pacing, the clarity? Things like that.

Good point. Now tell that to the trolls in the comment sections

With this new chapter I am going to try and publish the Grammarly free version and see how it turns out (with another read through with the advice I've received here in mind). If it gets through then I'll have more hope going forward, but I'm still disappointed about everything I edited and have not published. I don't think I can easily go back and change things to avoid the AI detection at this point.

Thank you for the advice.

 

[MillieDynamite]

@scbolder I read a lot of mainstream literature written by great writers. For mysteries, I read Earl Stanely Gardner, Dashiell Hammett, and Raymond Chandler and let their style sink in when I get ready to write one. The same goes for horror. I read or reread stories by my favorite writers, not using their words but putting me in that mood and using that specific style. Raymond Chandler credits Earl Stanely Gardner for how he learned to write a mystery but that he evolved into ambiguous endings more like real life.

So, knowing Chandler's preference, who killed the Chauffeur in the Big Sleep? Not even Chandler knows. It wasn't a plot hole; it was like reality. In fact, neither of the killers was punished in the book. They had Boggie kill Eddy Mars in the movie so that someone was punished, but not in the book.

EDIT: The novel and movie also had Marlow suggest that Carmen Sternwood be sent to a mental hospital. Carmen defiantly murdered her lover, Rusty Regan, and hid him in a pond. Eddie or Eddy Mars most likely killed his wife and made it appear as if she ran away with Rusty. He knew about Carmen having killed Rusty and blackmailed her, but Bogart leveraged Mars into stopping the blackmail. Again, this is in the book. All of this brings Marlow to contemplation, " You were dead, you were sleeping the big sleep, you were not bothered by things like that, oil and water were the same as wind and air to you."

 

[StillStunned]

That's fair, but I've never studied creative writing, so I only practiced what was desired in my field and that was definitely simple. Before publishing to Lit in 2020 the last piece of fiction I wrote was probably when I was 10. So, trying to learn it at this point is a slow process. I have decades of experience pulling me towards more formal "essay" or technical writing, so AI input or not, that's how I write, or more accurately, edit.

I've never studied creative writing. For my MA, I gave up on anything later than the 14th century as soon as I could. And for the past 25 years I've been editing almost exclusively B2B and B2C texts.

So my approach when writing fiction is this: imagine you're telling your story to a friend over a drink. Use that kind of language, those kinds of sentences. Simple structures are often more effective than complicated ones, because they let the reader focus on the story instead of the words.*

* Of course this assumes that your story is your main focus. Another possibility is to use the story as a vehicle to play with language, almost verging on poetry. Most writers probably fall somewhere in between.

 

[lustychimera]

I get that, and you are probably right, but to answer your question, it is because way back in high school I had it drilled into my head over and over that passive voice was bad in writing. This continued in my early professional career. Ironically, those same teachers are what made me stay away from creative writing for over 20 years since. Still, I find it hard to shake those "rules" even if my flow state writing avoids them. It is definitely something to focus on moving forward

Dude, I'm right there with ya. I started writing because I was reading some shitty machine translated Korean webnovel, and was like "I can do better than that!"

And I couldn't.

But then I started slowly getting into the whole writing culture, and just learning shit in the forums and on internet videos, the kind of little nuances that I didn't know enough to know that I didn't know, and kinda worked out my own thing.

From what I've seen, that's kinda what most people do.

But it's definitely one of those hobbies that becomes progressively more fun the better you get at it. It's worth sticking it out until it just kinda clicks.

I've said it a bunch, but the best way to get better isn't to write. It's to learn how to critique other people's stuff so you know what to write. There's a "destructive readers" sub on that forum with the little red alien that would be a great place to start.

 

[Portly_Penguin]

Not sure that I qualify as a youngster anymore, but I’m not that much older than - to pick an AI-related example @Portly_Penguin - I don’t use Grammarly at all.

Emily

Please don't tag me in these sorts of things. I'm done with the AI conversation.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Please don't tag me in these sorts of things. I'm done with the AI conversation.

Sure

 

[MillieDynamite]

@Portly_Penguin Step away from the X. Bring back the Penguin. Or there will be... Trouble.

Please don't tag me in these sorts of things. I'm done with the AI conversation.

 

[STrent]

Please don't tag me in these sorts of things. I'm done with the AI conversation.

OMG you got rid of the Penguin. I am actually devastated.

 

[Portly_Penguin]

@Portly_Penguin Step away from the X. Bring back the Penguin. Or there will be... Trouble.

The penguins gone. I only came back to unwatch some threads I was still getting emails for.

 

[djrip]

I get what you are saying, but I don't agree that I should be flagged because I saw a yellow mark under some text and then realized myself that it was in passive voice and then changed it myself. If I had used a human editor that pointed out it was in passive voice and I changed it then no one would have an issue. I get there is a professional issue with displacing editors, but since I would not pay anyone to edit my work for Lit I don't think this applies here. So, my question is, how is this AI usage? If it isn't, then I shouldn't be banned from publishing because I did this.

Also, from other commenters, it sounds like I just write like and AI, which I just find weird to comprehend as a reason to not be able to publish on Lit.

You have the same problem as many others: it's not that you are doing anything wrong. It's just that lit is using AI detection software, none of which is reliable, and people who's work triggers the software are paying the price in the form of false positives. It sucks and there's not much to be done about it except keep trying to tweak and resubmit with notes to Laurel explaining you didn't use AI.

 

[djrip]

In one of Flannery O'Connors's letters, I don't remember to whom, there is a one-sentence paragraph imitating a teenager who worked for. It is 250 words long, and you're out of breath by the time you get through it, just like the girl was, and whoever listened to her ramble from one subject to another, rushing through the words as they formed in her head. Of course, Grammarly or ProWritingAid would hate it, but I loved it. It was how teenagers often talk.

That's a reality of life, and AI can't do that right.

It will.

 

[djrip]

Why is it anything to "catch," though? When you were writing and in the moment, you clearly thought passive voice expressed it best, so why change it?

And it's not really you making the decision if you're only making it to adhere to an (IMO) inapplicable ruleset tailored toward writing essays and simple prose rather than a creative expression.

There's nothing wrong with passive voice. Maybe think about specifically why you're making all those changes like that, what effect it has on the story. And not just for the AI thing but to help find a solid voice.

I agree the spellcheck is fine, but the issue with grammar checks is that grammar is the actual syntax. That's the expression of your words itself. It's not comparable to changing the spelling, which is a binary, yes, it's right, or no, it's not.

Even punctuation. Does that dependent clause really need a comma? What's that do to the pacing, the clarity? Things like that.

Because he wanted to change the passive voice. It's ridiculous that people are having to second guess their choice because maybe some software will think those choices indicate AI. Another case of human writing being lost because the author has to change what they decided to write everywhere a piece of AI detection software says there is an issue. The site's obsession with keeping out AI is, ironically, forcing people to change their human written works into something different than what they intended based on the input of AI.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I seriously doubt that AI will. It will get better, but without understanding genuine emotion, it will only be porn and only, maybe, fair to middling porn. It will never produce words that sound like a crazy, mixed-up teen. If it ever truly writes like a good writer, then humanity has lost itself to technology. I don't want to live in a world like that. Bring on the Terminator, bring on the Machine and Samaritan, and let them battle for the soul of man. We will be irrelevant. AI should do dishes, laundry, and vacuum our carpets so we can write, paint, and draw. What you propose is humans are irrelevant. At that point, then literotic is irrelevant, creativity is useless, and humanity is lost.

It will.

 

[lustychimera]

It's ridiculous that people are having to second guess their choice because maybe some software will think those choices indicate AI.

My point there was less about AI and more that, if they're just making a mechanical correction to comply with a pedantic ruleset, that's not actually the author making a change because they want to.

If they genuinely thought it was better for the story, that'd be a different thing, but that wasn't my takeaway from how they described their editing process.

The human writing aspect is lost more when writers blindly listen to their high school teachers without questioning those strict guidelines of expression.

And I do think that if they loosen up, their work will be less likely to be flagged.

 

[lovecraft68]

Matters to everyone but the one person who needs to do something about it.

All these threads about it, and its like

 

[lustychimera]

Matters to everyone but the one person who needs to do something about it.

All these threads about it, and its like

It's still fun to talk about the mechanics of writing. More fun when other people disagree, and then you can have a discussion about it.

Whether the poster listens to what people are saying or not is entirely on them.

 

[EroticPower]

I have looked a lot into this, scoured a lot of the forums complaining about AI, and it seems to revolve around the fear of being in legal trouble because AI is basically using stolen content from other stories and just preparing just in case there is any blowback from it. But I feel that AI assisted and AI Generated stories have their own section and I think the author of that story should make sure to let their readers know that AI was involved in the writing, that way people can make an informed decision whether they want to read it. I know someone has made that idea in one of the forums and it received a mixed reaction but I do feel that would be the next logical solution going forward.

Because right now, it’s a s**t show. People’s work are getting rejected for AI even though they claim it’s not AI (maybe some of them are lying but the thing is the owner are putting all of them in the same basket using a shoddy AI Detection software to detect AI Written work that’s been established that AI detection software do not work, they are the lie detectors of the 21st century)). And its now gone to the point where people are being asked to change their writing style as it looks similar to how AI does it which justifiably they would be angry and frustrated that they are being asked to change their style, their way of writing,(even though as we established AI didn’t create that writing, it copies other people’s work, meaning it uses another person’s writing style and what’s worse, even though we can spot the telltale signs that it’s written by AI, one day it won’t be that easy anymore, it will come to a point where it would be indistinguishable). This policy is not a long term solution as all it does is push people away, alienate potential authors who could have contributed to this community.I understand there are people who in this community who see this as a good thing judging from reading the forums, and that’s fine as I agree with you to a certain point. Anyone who uses AI to write their own stories (not assisted writing) are not authors of their works, they are basically making Frankenstein and the stitches are more easier to see at the moment, one day it won’t. And the community that was once a friendly place is now a shadow of its former self, people attacking each other, accusing each other, belittling, bullying, these problems existed before the AI thing but now it’s exacerbated this problem.

I worry for this site’s future, not because it’s all relying on someone who has probably worked non stop, for the past 2 decades keeping this site up,but also the fear that if there is blowback if will hit the owner with legal ramifications that will shut the website down as a result (Which I understand that fear as this is her creation) but that fear has resulted in going in the complete opposite where now people who don’t use AI are being rejected and put in the same basket as the people who use AI so now they feel like they do not want to write anymore or like I’ve seen on the forums people recommend to try anywhere else(which while it’s a short term solution for now, like I said, when AI evolves to the point when their writing is indistinguishable, more authors are going to have their work rejected, pushing more and more people out).

In my opinion, the sites that does need to worry about legal ramifications is sites like Amazon and DeviantArt as they let AI work be monetised there, that is wrong as the thief is profiting off stolen bits of work, that’s where I draw a line, that’s when it goes too far when it is monetised.

For authors who have their work rejected, maybe it’s best to wait till the AI fiasco dies down within a year or two, in the meantime, I recommend trying out alternative sites instead like Archive Of Our Own or maybe write your own stories in your own blog or website, make your own corner where you can express your own stories maybe, that’s up to you. But I believe within a year or two, there will be a better solution that will suit the writers,the moderators and the owner of this site because at the end of the day, we want the website to keep continuing as it’s stacked with hundreds of stories, stories that people love and remember.

-For now,

 

[StillStunned]

maybe it’s best to wait till the AI witch-hunt dies down

Maybe it's best to stop referring to the situation as a "witch hunt", which implies malicious persecution, and instead show some appreciation for Laurel's efforts to keep the site free from AI-generated content. If you've been following the discussion like you say you have, you'll have seen that she's blocking something like 50-75 stories a day.

Unfortunately some authors are caught in the net, but that's not something anyone in the Hangout can do anything about - except give pointers and suggestions about how to make their writing less like AI.

And before we get into the whole "But I shouldn't have to change my style!" roundabout, pretty much everyone here is open to feedback on our stories and our writing. Everyone offers and takes tips to improve their writing, in all kinds of ways. This is just one, and potentially one that will help with the approval process.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Mass hysteria continues to abound:

1. There are not wholesale AI-related rejections - more stories are published here than ever
2. The most typical rejection is something like: Lit: you used Grammarly suggestions quite a lot Author: didn’t realize they were AI-generated, will fix Lit: cool!
3. There are edge cases, I’ve worked with some of them (maybe 8 now) my observation was that their natural style (giving the benefit of the doubt) was AI-adjacent and their work read a bit uncanny valley

I know it’s horrible to be one of the edge cases, I sympathize. But it is quite rare. Just look at the number of new stories published.

Emily

 

[EroticPower]

I apologise, I meant that Laurel has worked non stop for two decades which is both awesome and something I don’t envy because if I was in that position, I would have quit a long time ago as I wouldn’t have coped with that much and the fact that Laurel is still here is something we should all aspire to really,but I feel like this is where the fear comes from, two decades fostering and creating this community and this AI has come about and it might threaten that website so obviously I understand from that point of view to protect it. But there needs to be a balance, and sure right now it’s mostly Grammarly that’s the cause, but what is going to be concerning is the Iceball effect is created here. AI is evolving much faster than anticipated than it was a few years ago, and while Laurel is handling it right now, like I said in my post, eventually you won’t see the stitches in the Frankenstein piece of writing, and it would be completely indistinguishable than a human piece of writing. (Although I see that people have found a way to make it indistinguishable by training the AI to write it in a amateur imperfect way instead of writing it professionally even evading AI detectors so that’s also concerning as well). Which will make things harder for Laurel to moderate work and it results in other authors that have not used Grammarly will end up getting their stories rejected. So this is a short term solution, it won’t work long term when AI evolves more.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I apologise, I meant that Laurel has worked non stop for two decades which is both awesome and something I don’t envy because if I was in that position, I would have quit a long time ago as I wouldn’t have coped with that much and the fact that Laurel is still here is something we should all aspire to really,but I feel like this is where the fear comes from, two decades fostering and creating this community and this AI has come about and it might threaten that website so obviously I understand from that point of view to protect it. But there needs to be a balance, and sure right now it’s mostly Grammarly that’s the cause, but what is going to be concerning is the Iceball effect is created here. AI is evolving much faster than anticipated than it was a few years ago, and while Laurel is handling it right now, like I said in my post, eventually you won’t see the stitches in the Frankenstein piece of writing, and it would be completely indistinguishable than a human piece of writing. (Although I see that people have found a way to make it indistinguishable by training the AI to write it in a amateur imperfect way instead of writing it professionally even evading AI detectors so that’s also concerning as well). Which will make things harder for Laurel to moderate work and it results in other authors that have not used Grammarly will end up getting their stories rejected. So this is a short term solution, it won’t work long term when AI evolves more.

Could we worry about what’s actually happening versus what might?

Emily

 

[EroticPower]

Maybe it's best to stop referring to the situation as a "witch hunt", which implies malicious persecution, and instead show some appreciation for Laurel's efforts to keep the site free from AI-generated content. If you've been following the discussion like you say you have, you'll have seen that she's blocking something like 50-75 stories a day.

Unfortunately some authors are caught in the net, but that's not something anyone in the Hangout can do anything about - except give pointers and suggestions about how to make their writing less like AI.

And before we get into the whole "But I shouldn't have to change my style!" roundabout, pretty much everyone here is open to feedback on our stories and our writing. Everyone offers and takes tips to improve their writing, in all kinds of ways. This is just one, and potentially one that will help with the approval process.

I agree, I went a bit too far with saying it’s a witch hunt, I changed it to fiasco as it’s more of a confusing mess than a witch hunt.

 

[EroticPower]

Could we worry about what’s actually happening versus what might?

Emily

Yeah, we could, but right now Literotica is basically putting a band aid on a larger gaping wound if we just focus on the now, it doesn’t heal it, it just relieves the bleeding. But it will get infected. The wound will get worse I’m afraid. Just worrying on the now is a big mistake as it concerns the future of not just this website but any website that lets people publish their own stories like Wattpad. It’s a big problem that’s not going to get better.