Do moderators use algorithms to reject stories?

[BaldMerkin]

I've been happily submitting stories for years but recently some have been rejected by the moderators. The vague reasons seem to be part of a standard response rather than details. Eg. underage, AI generated, et cetera.

Some rejections are just unwarranted, so I wonder if the moderators are using an algorithm to search for keywords that prompts a rejection.

I don't have a problem with using algorithms to identify potential problems, but if the algorithm prompts a rejection: the moderators must read the story to identify the reasons; assess if the algorithm is correct, or if it's just identifying keywords, and, if the story does break the rules, then give details of why the story was rejected rather than just accepting the algorithm's response and giving a general statement about underage, AI generated, et cetera.

Has anybody seen this type of rejection for no good reason?

 

[ronde]

As far as I know, the "moderators" are one person, that being Laurel. It's apparent that she's using some sort of software to sort out stories that don't conform to the ground rules, but with the number of stories submitted every day, it's hard to see how she has a choice. The number of stories published runs between 150 and 200 per day. If she spent only five minutes with each story, that's a minimum of 12 hours and I don't think it's possible for one person to read much over a thousand words in five minutes. Adding verification to every rejection would only add to the time required and stretch out the approval process and reduce the number of stories published every day.

I'm not sure when Laurel introduced the software, but the "reasons for rejection" are boilerplate generated by the software, and I'm sure there are several algorithms used and that they use key words to reject a story.

I have received a rejection notice for a few of my stories, but they've all been accurate once I reviewed what I wrote.

Things I have learned to watch for when I write:

1. Don't just imply that a character is over 18. A person will get the implication. Software won't. You need to state ages of very young characters in some way that can't be misinterpreted.
In the US, "high school" usually means an age of 17 to 18, so just saying "high school age" can get you into trouble if there's any sex involved.
2. Be careful about stories that take place in current times involving politics, even international politics.
3. Stay away from the current fad of using some brand AI software to do your checking for you. I do not use any sort of correction software except for the spelling check in Word, and I usually don't accept it's correction.

 

[IWroteThis]

In the US, "high school" usually means an age of 17 to 18, so just saying "high school age" can get you into trouble if there's any sex involved.

Actually, that age range is just for high school seniors. The full range for high school is roughly 14 to 18.

 

[BaldMerkin]

In Australia, and many other developed countries, the legal age of consent is 16. Unfortunately, USA websites force their values on other countries.

 

[IWroteThis]

In Australia, and many other developed countries, the legal age of consent is 16. Unfortunately, USA websites force their values on other countries.

In the majority of US states, the age of consent is 16 as well. Less than a quarter of the states are 18, with the rest being 17. It's just easier to comply with the most restrictive regulations rather than piecemealing things.

It's the same reason I find GDPR compliance listed on many US sites.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I've been happily submitting stories for years but recently some have been rejected by the moderators. The vague reasons seem to be part of a standard response rather than details. Eg. underage, AI generated, et cetera.

There are a dozen or so generic responses, covering the typical reasons for rejection. On occasion, specifics are given relating to a story, but not often.

Some rejections are just unwarranted, so I wonder if the moderators are using an algorithm to search for keywords that prompts a rejection.

Mostly likely word bots, looking for suspicious phrases and combinations

I don't have a problem with using algorithms to identify potential problems, but if the algorithm prompts a rejection: the moderators must read the story to identify the reasons; assess if the algorithm is correct, or if it's just identifying keywords, and, if the story does break the rules, then give details of why the story was rejected rather than just accepting the algorithm's response and giving a general statement about underage, AI generated, et cetera.

It's definitely an automated process to start with, which puts the onus on authors to scrub their content. We all get caught at one time or another, it's part of the system.

The site gets hundreds of stories a week, there's one person vetting content, and she's not going to look at everything.

Has anybody seen this type of rejection for no good reason?

There's usually a reason, folk just don't look hard enough for it.

The best approach is to consider the reasons for rejection, answer the questions to the best of your ability, knowing the context of your story (and knowing you're dealing with a pretty basic bot of some sort) and if you think your content is fine, resubmit with a Note to the Editor.

 

[Bamagan]

I've been happily submitting stories for years but recently some have been rejected by the moderators. The vague reasons seem to be part of a standard response rather than details. Eg. underage, AI generated, et cetera.

Some rejections are just unwarranted, so I wonder if the moderators are using an algorithm to search for keywords that prompts a rejection.

I don't have a problem with using algorithms to identify potential problems, but if the algorithm prompts a rejection: the moderators must read the story to identify the reasons; assess if the algorithm is correct, or if it's just identifying keywords, and, if the story does break the rules, then give details of why the story was rejected rather than just accepting the algorithm's response and giving a general statement about underage, AI generated, et cetera.

Has anybody seen this type of rejection for no good reason?

There is almost certainly a point during the review process when one or more scans/searches for potential issues occurs. I presume that they are manually initiated, because if it was a completely automated process that triggered rejections they would bounce back to us within minutes of submission; at any rate, it seems that anything 'failing' the scans gets looked at, at least briefly, before being sent back. So it's likely that any story that raises too many flags gets one of two treatments: a rejection without further review, or it gets shunted to a pile of 'when I can get around to it' stories for more careful reading, which probably accounts for at least part of the group of people who endure weeks on the pending list.

As for what the moderator must do: almost nothing. Submitting a story here, or at any other similar site, does not create any obligations to you on their behalf, other than a few obvious legal ones like not stealing your work. They have some legal requirements about the content they host, which is largely why there's a review process in the first place. They also have the practical incentive to spend, say, a hour approving twenty stories that raised no flags rather than carefully reading one with a dozen flags to see if each of them was warranted and then composing a detailed response. That would be time wasted, especially if the first response from most rejected writers would be to defend or argue their case rather than make edits.

 

[ElectricBlue]

There is almost certainly a point during the review process when one or more scans/searches for potential issues occurs. I presume that they are manually initiated, because if it was a completely automated process that triggered rejections they would bounce back to us within minutes of submission;

The first go is definitely automated. I had an "under age" ping three minutes after submission - I knew immediately what the triggering sentence would have been, so resubmitted with a note, giving context. The story was cleared twelve hours later, and published two days later.

at any rate, it seems that anything 'failing' the scans gets looked at, at least briefly, before being sent back. So it's likely that any story that raises too many flags gets one of two treatments: a rejection without further review,

Agree - putting the onus back on the author to check their text for possible trigger text (a short phrase can be enough to trigger a word bot), and to argue their case. In most cases, a resubmission will get through the second pass, which I suspect is a quick scan from human eyes.

or it gets shunted to a pile of 'when I can get around to it' stories for more careful reading, which probably accounts for at least part of the group of people who endure weeks on the pending list.

I'd like to how many of those long pending stories eventually get through, given that the reports increased as part of the AI deluge - and seem to be reducing nowadays.

As for what the moderator must do: almost nothing. Submitting a story here, or at any other similar site, does not create any obligations to you on their behalf, other than a few obvious legal ones like not stealing your work. They have some legal requirements about the content they host, which is largely why there's a review process in the first place. They also have the practical incentive to spend, say, a hour approving twenty stories that raised no flags rather than carefully reading one with a dozen flags to see if each of them was warranted and then composing a detailed response. That would be time wasted, especially if the first response from most rejected writers would be to defend or argue their case rather than make edits.

Agree this assessment.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

In the majority of US states, the age of consent is 16 as well. Less than a quarter of the states are 18, with the rest being 17. It's just easier to comply with the most restrictive regulations rather than piecemealing things.

It's the same reason I find GDPR compliance listed on many US sites.

You shouldn't confuse "age of consent" with "age of majority" or you will continue to be disappointed.

In the U.S., states have different definitions for "age of consent". Nationally, there is only one legally recognized "age of majority", which is the age of 18.

A person can engage in sexual activity once they reach the age of consent, but they cannot be exposed to sex, or depicted as having sexual activity until they reach the age of majority.

 

[Bamagan]

The first go is definitely automated. I had an "under age" ping three minutes after submission - I knew immediately what the triggering sentence would have been, so resubmitted with a note, giving context. The story was cleared twelve hours later, and published two days later.

I've had, I think, four rejections, and all of them took between one and three days to initially get sent back, which argues against pure automation at the time of submission. I've also had one story get approved in something like seven minutes. To me, the evidence suggests that, as a general rule, neither approvals nor rejections happen automatically, although I suppose it's possible that some small number of trigger conditions exist that do bypass human intervention. It's also possible that the process has changed and evolved, or even that Laurel has some kind of 'autopilot' that she occasionally uses.

 

[PennameWombat]

<snip>

Has anybody seen this type of rejection for no good reason?

Are you certain it's unwarranted?

I had one story returned for underage content. Just that, no further details. I don't recall how long it took, but it was around a day, not more than two, after submission.

The problem as I interpreted it was apparently where I had two mid-20s mothers flirt with a male pool employee (already established to be 18) while their children played in the kiddie swimming pool at a municipal pool complex.

I redid that short section by having both sets of children away from the pool with their grandmothers while the two mothers were in the adult section of the pool complex and they flirted with and teased the male employee there. Passed without further difficulty, and that was the sole change.

This was in 2020, and later that year (I'm reasonably sure) there was another thread here in AH essentially about this same subject, use of software to scan submissions, and pretty well everything said here so far was said then. I recall that because I described this situation at the time as it was quite fresh in my mind.

I submitted a story in 2023 (Maddy Moo Cow) which involved a bisexual mother and her baby, and her male and female lovers. The mother enjoyed having the male lover suckle at her breasts (the female lover refused to do so). I was careful to keep the baby's involvement clearly separate from the sexual content. Passed through with no rejection. So that implies that there isn't a simple keyword search (e.g., "baby", "breast milk", "suckling", etc.) as that story would've blown up big time if it was solely triggered by word matches.

 

[EmilyMiller]

In Australia, and many other developed countries, the legal age of consent is 16. Unfortunately, USA websites force their values on other countries.

Maybe the solution is to publish on an Australian site instead.

 

[BaldMerkin]

Which Australian site would that be?

 

[EmilyMiller]

Rules on age and pornographic movies / images in Australia (according to Gemini, because I’m lazy):

Actors must be at least 18 years old to legally appear in pornography in Australia. While the general "age of consent" for consensual sexual activity ranges between 16 and 17 depending on the Australian state or territory, federal and state laws draw a strict line when it comes to recording, producing, or distributing sexually explicit content.

Key legal requirements regarding age in the Australian adult industry include:

• Strict Minimum Age: Anyone filmed or depicted in a sexual manner must be a minimum of 18 years old. Producing, possessing, or sharing sexually explicit material involving anyone under 18 falls under severe federal and state child exploitation laws.
• Appearance of Age: Under Australian classification and criminal laws, it is also illegal to produce or distribute pornography where an actor over 18 portrays or appears to be a minor (such as wearing school uniforms or utilizing themes associated with minors).
• Live Performances: It is a criminal offense nationwide to involve anyone under the age of 18 in a live sexual performance if any form of payment or reward is involved.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Which Australian site would that be?

Precisely

 

[BaldMerkin]

I thought that you were going to suggest a website on which to publish stories.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

I thought that you were going to suggest a website on which to publish stories.

Instead, she was implying that there is no site hosted in Australia which has weaker restrictions than US-based sites, because their legal restrictions are just as strict as the US ones.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Instead, she was implying that there is no site hosted in Australia which has weaker restrictions than US-based sites, because their legal restrictions are just as strict as the US ones.

 

[Trionyx]

It never hurts to drop a note to admin if there is a section in your story that could be questionable. If there are even kids of one of the sexually active adults, I make sure to mention that they are never invoved. The word ‘babysitter’ seems to trigger a review and a note explaining their situation can be a good idea.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

A person can engage in sexual activity once they reach the age of consent, but Literotica site rules say they cannot be depicted as being exposed to sex, or depicted as having sexual activity until they reach the age of majority.

Very slight clarification to an otherwise very correct response.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

It never hurts to drop a note to admin if there is a section in your story that could be questionable. If there are even kids of one of the sexually active adults, I make sure to mention that they are never invoved. The word ‘babysitter’ seems to trigger a review and a note explaining their situation can be a good idea.

This. I find a good way to avoid rejections is to include an admin note with the first selection, along the lines of: There is a section where the MFC says she feels like a 12-year-old. This is obviously just a simile; all characters are 18+.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Very slight clarification to an otherwise very correct response.

The law is broader than just Literotica. Let's not make people believe that this site operates differently under the law than others.

The age of majority applies to all adult content, on all websites, and live adult entertainment, such as strippers and cam girls.

 

[JGittes]

Maybe @SimonDoom can jump in here for more legal clarification, but there is no legal requirement for sexual activity to be restricted to 18 or over; it is purely site policy.

Go to any bookstore in any state in the US (well, maybe not any bookstore, but at least some bookstores), and you can buy and read Lolita. The police will not come and arrest you, nor will they arrest the publisher.

I've read hundreds of romance novels, and a surprisingly non-zero number include 14- and 15-year-old characters having sex, babies, and all the romantic folder-all that entails.

I believe I have read reports of legal action taken by overzealous prosecutors (or maybe properly zealous, don't know) taking someone to trial over allegations of possessing child pornography of a written sort. I don't know the outcome of these extremely rare occurrences. Successful child pornography prosecutions are almost always for material that is visual in nature.

The site policy of restricting sex to those 18 and over may be based on a real or imagined fear of possible legal action, but 'legal' age of consent has nothing to do with it.

 

[SimonDoom]

Maybe @SimonDoom can jump in here for more legal clarification, but there is no legal requirement for sexual activity to be restricted to 18 or over; it is purely site policy.

Go to any bookstore in any state in the US (well, maybe not any bookstore, but at least some bookstores), and you can buy and read Lolita. The police will not come and arrest you, nor will they arrest the publisher.

I've read hundreds of romance novels, and a surprisingly non-zero number include 14- and 15-year-old characters having sex, babies, and all the romantic folder-all that entails.

I believe I have read reports of legal action taken by overzealous prosecutors (or maybe properly zealous, don't know) taking someone to trial over allegations of possessing child pornography of a written sort. I don't know the outcome of these extremely rare occurrences. Successful child pornography prosecutions are almost always for material that is visual in nature.

The site policy of restricting sex to those 18 and over may be based on a real or imagined fear of possible legal action, but 'legal' age of consent has nothing to do with it.

This is correct, at least in the US. Written erotica is not pornography, which consists of visual depiction of sexual activity. There is no such thing as a law in the US that strictly prevents writing about sexual activity about people under 18. There are a few precedents for prosecution under obscenity laws of authors who write and publish stories featuring violent sexual exploitation of children. Im not aware of any laws that would criminalize the stories that literotica allows, or even m any of the stories it doesn't allow.

 

[SmilingLez]

There certainly seems to be some automated screening involved, based on the experiences people have described here. What I find more interesting is how much of the rest of the process is being inferred from those experiences.

A fast rejection, a delayed rejection, a story sitting in pending purgatory, or a story passing after a resubmission can tell us what happened to that particular submission. It doesn't necessarily tell us exactly what the system did behind the scenes.

The real question is where the automated screening ends and human review begins (if indeed there is a human review, no ROI for a commercial for profit porn site) and whether that boundary is consistent.