AwkwardMD AI Rejection Help Desk

[AwkwardMD]

I should also note that plastering the site with a large volume of works right on top of each other is also a red flag. That's not to say you don't have a reason for doing so, as you mentioned above, but it might be worth taking a slower approach.

 

[Pinkie3_14]

I'm attempting a submission with a note now, just waiting for a response.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I'm attempting a submission with a note now, just waiting for a response.

I'm sorry that this is all so frustrating. Lit's submission system has been under assault (I use the phrase lightly) for years now, and it has a limited capacity to differentiate genuine and ungenuine human writing. It's not broken, but it is also not perfect.

 

[da804]

I'm glad to see someone monitors.
Back on topic.
This is the noteworthy part of my rejection notice:

• Are you using Grammarly, ProWritingAid, Quillbot or similar software, or allowing Microsoft Word grammar check to change your words? Many modern writing packages incorporate AI. Literotica is a storytelling community centered on the sharing of human fantasies. While we do not have a policy against using tools to help with the writing process (i.e. sp, grammar check, etc.), we do ask that all work published on Literotica be created primarily by a human. If you are using a grammar check program to review your work so that you can make changes (as a spellcheck, to flag punctuation, review grammar, and/or occasionally as a thesaurus), that should be fine. If you are allowing a grammar check program to “rewrite” your words or rephrase your text, that may cross the line into AI generated text/stories (since substantial parts of the final draft may not be written by you). 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.

I've followed this and my work conforms. I am the originator not the AI elements of Grammarly. Currently, I've stripped the story down to its bare content and will resubmit. It's nearly that 'See Dick. See Jane.' level. Let's see how that flies.

This is the same message I received in my rejection notice. Like you, I use the Grammarly paid version for grammar, spelling, and occasional word choice and sentence structure. However, my work is completely mine. I'm unwilling to rewrite my story because I worked hard on it and think it's strong.

I had submitted my story 20 days ago and it sat, unmoving, in a pending state. I yanked it and resubmitted it yesterday - and it was sent back today.

I'll be interested to hear how your stripped-down story works.

 

[AwkwardMD]

This is the same message I received in my rejection notice. Like you, I use the Grammarly paid version for grammar, spelling, and occasional word choice and sentence structure. However, my work is completely mine. I'm unwilling to rewrite my story because I worked hard on it and think it's strong.

I had submitted my story 20 days ago and it sat, unmoving, in a pending state. I yanked it and resubmitted it yesterday - and it was sent back today.

I'll be interested to hear how your stripped-down story works.

Please make sure you read the initial post of this thread.

 

[PennyThompson]

However, my work is completely mine.

and occasional word choice and sentence structure.

Well unfortunately, however you may feel about your work, this means that AI has a hand in your writing process, and your story will be rejected because of it

If you can revert back to the version of your writing before you let Grammarly start doing things to it, you should do so.

 

[SkyBubble]

Write your own story. Edit your own story, or enlist the aid of a volunteer editor.

And you can still get flagged for AI.

 

[SkyBubble]

Feeling put up on are you?

Not uncommon.

I didn't see you provide any help in the thread.

Because it hasn't happened.

I was looking for some clue or rhyme or reason for why the Lit AI acts as it does.

I don't believe anyone on this board knows that.

You haven't indicated any clue for it. So there seems to be no help here. Have you or have you not helped someone over the AI issues? Simple question. If so, what kind of things did you point out that readers could also address?

I'd like to know that too.

 

[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

 

[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.

What I should have said, the point I was trying to make, is that the line in the sand that Lit draws is that the site is for humans to connect with each other through the medium of erotic writing. They are less interested in you getting your ideas perfectly polished than they are in getting your ideas, because that’s what readers will connect with. If readers want to sext with AI they can go do that, but if they want something heartfelt, and made with care, that's what you can find at Lit.

This is not to say that every story here is a deeply cared for Etsy package, some of it is definitely being cranked out, but it is what Literotica is interested in publishing.

The problem is that AI generated writing and human writing that has been edited and finessed by AI are functionally indistinguishable. If they want to keep the first one out, and they do, the second one has to go with it, but the only real concession is that the writing will be a little less polished, and a little less professional. As far as they're concerned, that's an acceptable trade.

 

[Nexii]

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

Of course I understand that's the issue. AI can churn out a story in 5 seconds, minus the explicit content. And there's probably AIs out there that will even do that part for you.

Here's the first issue. When you sign up, the policy on AI is not so obvious. I submitted two stories without even being aware. You're probably getting tons of submissions from people who innocently don't even know. It took ~2 weeks even to be sent back, so it seems like losing against a relentless deluge anyways.

If AI isn't being used to auto-detect patterns (which I do believe, based on the delay), then my story is still going to be sent back even if AI didn't write a single line. Why? Because once you use it and learn from it you learn to structure stories in a certain logical way that most people just don't do. There's no going back. So 100% on my own, I'd get to the same place, but it would just take much longer. Instead of a few weeks, a story would take a few months.

I think what's really preferred by people here is lower-effort erotica, and that's fine. It just isn't for me.