AwkwardMD AI Rejection Help Desk

[AwkwardMD]

Hello, and thank you for this thread! I appreciate the clarity of your intention here.

I'm writing from the German side of Literotica, where a recent forum post led me to your post. So far, none of my stories have been flagged, but I was wondering:
Do you happen to know whether the same detection rules (or similiar patterns) apply to non-English submissions as well?

Our thread is filled with speculation and half-truths, although a fairly common denominator seems to be that people copy their texts into new docs after checking and deleting the old ones, possibly to clear invisible formatting traces? I don't know.

Another thing is, that tools like Grammarly or Quillbot aren't really a thing here, but many authors rely on spellcheckers or style suggestions in standard word processors. Microsoft's copilot is likely more widespread than people admit, though I can't back that up with data.

I have also seen ZeroGPT being mentioned as a self-check which offers questionable results at best. I ran my old bachelor thesis (from way before LLMs were public) through it, and it came back with a 20% possibility for being written by AI.

Hello!

I suspect that Lit's AI Detector would work in German, but unfortunately that's so far out of my range of expertise that I feel uncomfortable making guesses.

On the one hand, I think my advice is still the same. Write it yourself, (ideally) edit it yourself (or enlist some trusted allies), and limit the number of programs or documents involved.

On the other hand, as much as this seems detrimental, I would encourage you to *not* spend a lot of time trying to disassemble how it works. Especially not in a public forum. It's not a perfect system, but it is a functioning system in a world that otherwise has no answers for how you stop AI from flooding in at every turn.

Keep it simple, and best of luck

 

[Minato_99]

So my story is still getting rejected.
I did just resubmit, pointing out in the note to mod that the only bit that is by AI is my disclaimer.

I'm probably answering my own question, but should I further edit my story. Removing the disclaimer or rewriting it into my own words.

 

[AwkwardMD]

So my story is still getting rejected.
I did just resubmit, pointing out in the note to mod that the only bit that is by AI is my disclaimer.

I'm probably answering my own question, but should I further edit my story. Removing the disclaimer or rewriting it into my own words.

i'm sorry, but why would you use AI to write a disclaimer about having not used AI?

 

[Minato_99]

i'm sorry, but why would you use AI to write a disclaimer about having not used AI?

I feel like I need to clarify. I mean in my story, the opening passage. The disclaimer or authors note is warning the reader what kind of kinks are included. I used AI to assist with writing that, but the story itself was written in my own words.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I feel like I need to clarify. I mean in my story, the opening passage. The disclaimer or authors note is warning the reader what kind of kinks are included. I used AI to assist with writing that, but the story itself was written in my own words.

No amount of "I only used AI to do X" is acceptable. Lit's AI Detector knows when you've allowed something inhuman to fiddle with your story, and getting it posted once it gets that first red flag usually requires someone else (like me) to vouch for you personally.

This is a bit like a boxer failing a PED test and saying "I only took it the one time, a couple weeks ago, because my mate was moving and I knew I was gonna have to carry his couch. It's like 3 flights of stairs!"

I'm sorry, but you might need to scrap that story and start over.

 

[Minato_99]

No amount of "I only used AI to do X" is acceptable. Lit's AI Detector knows when you've allowed something inhuman to fiddle with your story, and getting it posted once it gets that first red flag usually requires someone else (like me) to vouch for you personally.

This is a bit like a boxer failing a PED test and saying "I only took it the one time, a couple weeks ago, because my mate was moving and I knew I was gonna have to carry his couch. It's like 3 flights of stairs!"

I'm sorry, but you might need to scrap that story and start over.

I saw a recently uploaded story where in the disclaimer, the author wrote that they used AI to write the application in their story.

I figured so long as it's not relevant to the story itself, it would be fine.

 

[AwkwardMD]

If you believe another story has violated the rules, use the report feature. That being said, "that guy got away with it" is not a valid argument for you to also break the rules.

Good luck with your next story.

 

[Minato_99]

Fair point. I'll scrap and try again.

Would it help to point out in the note to the mod, that I review any suggestions or rewrites from grammarly, but make any edits myself?

 

[AwkwardMD]

Fair point. I'll scrap and try again.

Would it help to point out in the note to the mod, that I review any suggestions or rewrites from grammarly, but make any edits myself?

That would not need pointing out. It would be evident in the story itself.

 

[Minato_99]

That would not need pointing out. It would be evident in the story itself.

What about how I self-edit? I usually upload my work to Speechify and then listen to it.

 

[AwkwardMD]

What about how I self-edit? I usually upload my work to Speechify and then listen to it.

On the one hand, several users (like @StillStunned ) promote the use of Text-To-Speech programs to help process their work through a different sense (ears rather than eyes). I've found it useful myself.

However, I can't help but point out that Speechify is an AI voice-generation program.

 

[SkyBubble]

However, I can't help but point out that Speechify is an AI voice-generation program.

Spellcheckers are also AI, if somewhat basic AI. They're considered acceptable. I wouldn't think running it through Speechify or another program to see how it sounds would be a problem as long as you do all the actual writing yourself. I don't think it's any different from having a friend read it aloud to you, except your friend is a human.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Spellcheckers are also AI, if somewhat basic AI. They're considered acceptable. I wouldn't think running it through Speechify or another program to see how it sounds would be a problem as long as you do all the actual writing yourself. I don't think it's any different from having a friend read it aloud to you, except your friend is a human.

Spellcheckers are not driven by an LLM. It's wildly different, and conflating them only serves to muddy waters that I'm trying to keep clean.

My point is that it's a red flag when users who've already received a rejection for AI to continue to argue for more fringe uses of AI like "Well what if I only do X?"

 

[Minato_99]

I reuploaded a new file, making sure it was clean of any AI assistance. I'll let you know if I get approved.

 

[SkyBubble]

Spellcheckers are not driven by an LLM. It's wildly different, and conflating them only serves to muddy waters that I'm trying to keep clean.

My point is that it's a red flag when users who've already received a rejection for AI to continue to argue for more fringe uses of AI like "Well what if I only do X?"

View attachment 2561680

True -- AND they are a form of AI.

 

[Djinn68]

German author here. My latest entry in my latest series - with 38k words the largest yet - has been rejected.

While I understand the 'wish' of LIT, to keep it's content 'AI-free', I don't think it's feasible - not without a shadow of a doubt.

A machine can prove that i was driving too fast. But can it actually prove that I didn't write something personally? I doubt it.

I have resubmitted my story, without changing a word, with the following note to moderation:

Dear Laurel and Manu, Dear Moderator

I have not changed a single word. Because every single one of these words has been written by me, a human being. Not by a computer-program. Not by AI. After 3 years, 16 works and over half a million words (657.4 k) you either trust me - or you don't. You either publish my work as it is - or you don't. I will draw the appropriate conclusions and act accordingly. I will not be disrespected by letting a machine judge, if my work was written by another machine.

I had written a much longer note, but due to the limit of 510 characters, I had to boil it down to the essential parts. Here my full note:

Dear Laurel and Manu, Dear Moderator

Thank you for sending my story back - as a few of my paragraph separators (***) were not centered. This way, I was able to correct that.

But, besides that, I have not changed a single paragraph, a single sentence or a single word.

Why? - You may ask.

Well, it's pretty simple: Because every single one of these words has been written by me, a human being. Not by a computer-program. Not by AI.

By me, a human.

Now, some of us consider ourselves merely biological machines. Complex yes, but machines nonetheless. To me, there is one major difference to, say, the artificial machine that must have decided that another artificial machine had written at least substantial parts of my story, instead of me, the biological machine. We humans have an inevitable expiration date. Every moment that passes by is more precious than the one before, because there are fewer moments left to live. I am 57 years old now. I do not know how much time I have left, or how long my brain and my body will be fit enough, to be creative in this way.

In the last 3 years I have contributed 16 works. Way over half a million words (657.4 k), gathered 126 follower. All that may not seem much to you, but to me it has meant the world. I may be a niche-writer - german erotic sci-fi does not have that many readers, but by now I can confidently say, that I am good at what I am doing.

I have surrendered to the fact, that you do not intend to do anything substantial against the downvoter - who has finally managed to drag two of my works below the hot-threshhold. In my opinion you could fight it easily - by giving the authors the option, that only registered users can vote - but that's another story, maybe for another time.

But I will not be disrespected. I am a human being. My time in this universe is limited and precious. My words and phantasies will not be judged by a machine, to decide if they were written by another machine.

If you have trusted me for more than 600'000 words, continue to do so - or don't. Publish my work in its current form - or don't.

I will draw the appropriate conclusions and act accordingly.

Kind regards

Djinn68

While I appreciate your effort @AwkwardMD to me it feels like kowtowing to a machine, kissing human dignity goodbye.

 

[AwkwardMD]

German author here. My latest entry in my latest series - with 38k words the largest yet - has been rejected.

While I understand the 'wish' of LIT, to keep it's content 'AI-free', I don't think it's feasible - not without a shadow of a doubt.

A machine can prove that i was driving too fast. But can it actually prove that I didn't write something personally? I doubt it.

I have resubmitted my story, without changing a word, with the following note to moderation:

Dear Laurel and Manu, Dear Moderator

I have not changed a single word. Because every single one of these words has been written by me, a human being. Not by a computer-program. Not by AI. After 3 years, 16 works and over half a million words (657.4 k) you either trust me - or you don't. You either publish my work as it is - or you don't. I will draw the appropriate conclusions and act accordingly. I will not be disrespected by letting a machine judge, if my work was written by another machine.

I had written a much longer note, but due to the limit of 510 characters, I had to boil it down to the essential parts. Here my full note:

Dear Laurel and Manu, Dear Moderator

Thank you for sending my story back - as a few of my paragraph separators (***) were not centered. This way, I was able to correct that.

But, besides that, I have not changed a single paragraph, a single sentence or a single word.

Why? - You may ask.

Well, it's pretty simple: Because every single one of these words has been written by me, a human being. Not by a computer-program. Not by AI.

By me, a human.

Now, some of us consider ourselves merely biological machines. Complex yes, but machines nonetheless. To me, there is one major difference to, say, the artificial machine that must have decided that another artificial machine had written at least substantial parts of my story, instead of me, the biological machine. We humans have an inevitable expiration date. Every moment that passes by is more precious than the one before, because there are fewer moments left to live. I am 57 years old now. I do not know how much time I have left, or how long my brain and my body will be fit enough, to be creative in this way.

In the last 3 years I have contributed 16 works. Way over half a million words (657.4 k), gathered 126 follower. All that may not seem much to you, but to me it has meant the world. I may be a niche-writer - german erotic sci-fi does not have that many readers, but by now I can confidently say, that I am good at what I am doing.

I have surrendered to the fact, that you do not intend to do anything substantial against the downvoter - who has finally managed to drag two of my works below the hot-threshhold. In my opinion you could fight it easily - by giving the authors the option, that only registered users can vote - but that's another story, maybe for another time.

But I will not be disrespected. I am a human being. My time in this universe is limited and precious. My words and phantasies will not be judged by a machine, to decide if they were written by another machine.

If you have trusted me for more than 600'000 words, continue to do so - or don't. Publish my work in its current form - or don't.

I will draw the appropriate conclusions and act accordingly.

Kind regards

Djinn68

While I appreciate your effort @AwkwardMD to me it feels like kowtowing to a machine, kissing human dignity goodbye.

My thread is not the appropriate platform for you to pontificate on perceived injustices. If you got a rejection and you know why, and wish to get help correcting your mistake, I can help.

I'm not going to dissect your manifesto. You said your piece to Laurel. Putting this here, though, is just blustering.

I'm sorry your work was rejected. That's always hard, and it sounds like you put a lot of work into it, but I know what the AI detector is looking for and I know what it means when it found it. Write your own story, edit your own story, and you'll be fine.

 

[Djinn68]

My thread is not the appropriate platform for you to pontificate on perceived injustices. If you got a rejection and you know why, and wish to get help correcting your mistake, I can help.

I'm not going to dissect your manifesto. You said your piece to Laurel. Putting this here, though, is just blustering.

I'm sorry your work was rejected. That's always hard, and it sounds like you put a lot of work into it, but I know what the AI detector is looking for and I know what it means when it found it. Write your own story, edit your own story, and you'll be fine.

You are probably right about at least one thing. I am feeling the urge to vent, as the frustration I feel right now pains me physically. Sharing my stories here on LIT has brought me a form of satisfaction I didn't think possible. And that is why it hurts.
I apologize for disrupting your thread. But even though I received an automated (it has been posted verbatim a few times in these forums ...) message telling me why my story was rejected, I still have no clue.

I made no mistake that I am aware of - or could be aware of. I wrote every single word of my story myself. I had 4 (!) human editors go over it, before I submitted it - as I have done for every other single entry in this series and many of the previous series. I WRITE my own story, I EDIT my own story, but I am FAR FROM FINE.

Of course you can decide not to believe me. And I can see no way how I could convince anyone about my sincerity.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I made no mistake that I am aware of - or could be aware of. I wrote every single word of my story myself. I had 4 (!) human editors go over it, before I submitted it - as I have done for every other single entry in this series and many of the previous series. I WRITE my own story, I EDIT my own story, but I am FAR FROM FINE..

You didn’t edit it yourself, though, you had help, and You don’t know how those editors arrived at the changes they made. You only know what the document looks like when they're done with it. All it takes is one of them getting a little too comfortable with suggested changes from a program like MS Word (now enhanced with Co-Pilot!) to taint the document in the eyes of Lit's AI Detector.

I'm not saying this to cast aspersions on anyone. I am just pointing out that you didn't have the control over your own story that you thought you did.

 

[Djinn68]

You didn’t edit it yourself, though, you had help, and You don’t know how those editors arrived at the changes they made. You only know what the document looks like when they're done with it. All it takes is one of them getting a little too comfortable with suggested changes from a program like MS Word (now enhanced with Co-Pilot!) to taint the document in the eyes of Lit's AI Detector.

I'm not saying this to cast aspersions on anyone. I am just pointing out that you didn't have the control over your own story that you thought you did.

I know exactly, what changes were made:

• I write my storys with MS Word and correct interpunctuation, grammar, etc. manually - according to the suggestions made by word (no Co-Pilot involved). Sometimes they make sense, sometimes they don't - I decide.
• The first 3 of my "gang of helpers" do not make any changes to the document itself. They comment, if they find errors, plotholes or other things that might need editing. If I judge their findings as reasonable, I edit the original document accordingly, myself - I decide.
• My last editor does the last round of grammar- and spellchecking and sends me a corrected copy of the original.
• Afterwards, I export both versions, my original one and the one sent to me by my "last line of defence" as XML and use a little batch-programm (yes, written by AI ...) to make a txt-file out of it, with all the necessary tags for bold, italic and centered.
• I compare both versions (with notepad+) and take what I deem reasonable from the version sent to me and insert it manually into my txt-version - I decide.
• I copy the whole text and paste it into the submission field. That's it.

Now, according to your words I could only see one potential source for some "AI-Detector-shenanigans", with the corrections sent in by my last editor. In german, since the so-called "spelling reform" some words can be written as one (the new, correct way) or two (the old, antiquated way). For example. "To be sorry (for someone)" can be written "leidtun" or "Leid tun". These are the few main corrections my last editor made, which I copied into my "To-submit-txt-file".

Well, if you tell me that this is precisely the reason why this... AI detector is showing an allergic reaction, then the question arises as to whether the injustices are really only “perceived.”

Other than that ... I can see no other point in the whole process where some sort of automated alteration could happen. And no, the XML-To-Text-Program does no such thing.

Thank you for your time, @AwkwardMD, it is appreciated.

 

[AwkwardMD]

@Djinn68 You've got 6 itemized steps. Submit the version from after step 3.

 

[PennyThompson]

Afterwards, I export both versions, my original one and the one sent to me by my "last line of defence" as XML and use a little batch-programm (yes, written by AI ...) to make a txt-file out of it, with all the necessary tags for bold, italic and centered.

So... you are using a simple custom-built AI tool that modifies your text and injects machine-generated content into it?

 

[Djinn68]

So... you are using a simple custom-built AI tool that modifies your text and injects machine-generated content into it?

Yes, nefarious I know, how dare I save my word-document as an XML-Document, entrusting it to this artificial beast, to wrap some <center> around my ***, some <i> around my italic text and some <b> around the bold one, stripping the rest of the XML-nonsense...

Strangely enough, I have done it 4 times already - never having any problems with my submissions. Blind luck?

@AwkwardMD I'm not going to upload a word-document.

 

[PennyThompson]

Yes, nefarious I know, how dare I save my word-document as an XML-Document, entrusting it to this artificial beast, to wrap some <center> around my ***, some <i> around my italic text and some <b> around the bold one, stripping the rest of the XML-nonsense...

Strangely enough, I have done it 4 times already - never having any problems with my submissions. Blind luck?

@AwkwardMD I'm not going to upload a word-document.

I never said it was nefarious, I'm not assuming ill intent

But if Lit uses tools that look for machine-generated content, could you see how this might somehow be triggering it? Philosophically it might be in a different category from LLM-generated text, but mechanically the end result might be similar?

 

[AwkwardMD]

Yes, nefarious I know, how dare I save my word-document as an XML-Document, entrusting it to this artificial beast, to wrap some <center> around my ***, some <i> around my italic text and some <b> around the bold one, stripping the rest of the XML-nonsense...

Strangely enough, I have done it 4 times already - never having any problems with my submissions. Blind luck?

@AwkwardMD I'm not going to upload a word-document.

Okay