Pending??

[AwkwardMD]

Mistakes are not what makes something look like AI. @AwkwardMD is the local expert. In my experience reading student work, varying sentence length is the best way not to look like AI. But I have not read your stories so I can’t say what caused the problem

Lit's AI Detector is looking for something specific. It's not mistakes, purposeful or otherwise, and sentence length should not trigger it whether they are uniform or varied.

I have no doubt that this serves you well out in the real world for spotting students, but Lit's system does it differently.

 

[AwkwardMD]

The common belief is that purgatory is actually waiting for a manual review, which sometimes take a very long time to happen.

I'm sorry it happened to you.

I have to ask. Do you use Grammarly? That does count as using AI to write your story.

If you are truly not using AI (there absolutely are false accusations, that is unfortunately unavoidable if the site wants to keep AI generated stories out), there are threads here about what to do.

I also do not/no longer believe the pending purgatory had anything to do with manual reviews. Lit has always rejected any flagged story out of hand, and waited for a resubmit to invest time in a manual review.

You can see this in incorrect underage rejections. Including a 16 year old character will sometimes get a story rejected, but when you resubmit with a note and the story is accepted without changes that shows you where the manual review is happening.

I do not have an answer for the long pending times right now. I suspect it is related to the BTS swaps that are happening related to author feed activity. We are clearly all being transferred from one system to a middle waiting area, and then to a final area where everything works. My best guess is that long pending stories are related to that, although I still suspect it is a bug and not the designed intent of this multi-phase transition.

EDIT: i always suspected that waiting to do the manual review saved Laurel an unholy amount of time checking flagged stories that really were out of tolerance. I've personally had nearly all of my rejected stories published after an immediate resubmission.

 

[old_prof]

I also do not/no longer believe the pending purgatory had anything to do with manual reviews. Lit has always rejected any flagged story out of hand, and waited for a resubmit to invest time in a manual review.

You can see this in incorrect underage rejections. Including a 16 year old character will sometimes get a story rejected, but when you resubmit with a note and the story is accepted without changes that shows you where the manual review is happening.

I do not have an answer for the long pending times right now. I suspect it is related to the BTS swaps that are happening related to author feed activity. We are clearly all being transferred from one system to a middle waiting area, and then to a final area where everything works. My best guess is that long pending stories are related to that, although I still suspect it is a bug and not the designed intent of this multi-phase transition.

EDIT: i always suspected that waiting to do the manual review saved Laurel an unholy amount of time checking flagged stories that really were out of tolerance. I've personally had nearly all of my rejected stories published after an immediate resubmission.

Interesting. I believe you have much more actual knowledge than my pure speculation, so I assume you are right, In trying to build a new mental model for me, I'm trying to understand why many of the purgatories end up as AI rejections (and occasionally content rejections).

 

[Britva415]

under their own FAQ the powers that be stipulate that they don’t have an AI Policy

I don't see this as ironic. The absence of a policy doesn't mean they can't still refuse what they think is gen-AI work

 

[Dark_Logan_]

If there are no rules why is there a rule book?

 

[darwin1859]

Lit's AI Detector is looking for something specific [...] sentence length should not trigger it whether they are uniform or varied.

I have no doubt that this serves you well out in the real world for spotting students, but Lit's system does it differently.

@AwkwardMD, I'm curious what makes you think "burstiness" is uncorrelated to risk of being identified as AI by LE?

 

[darwin1859]

It seems to be the get out of jail free card …try not to bear in mind that under their own FAQ the powers that be stipulate that they don’t have an AI Policy

I think you're misreading that. The FAQ does say, "Literotica does not currently have an official comprehensive policy on Artificial Intelligence" but the rest of the FAQ seems pretty clear. For example, later:

Literotica’s Publishing Guidelines are clear - you must certify that you are the author of AND you own the copyright to any work published on Literotica. While simple AI tools (spelling and grammar tools, for example) do not usually interfere with an author’s copyright, there are unanswered questions around copyright when using some of the latest AI technologies that generate large blocks of text. If there are any questions about copyright related to any work you’ve used AI tools to help you create, we ask that you research and be 100% sure you own the full rights to the work before attempting to publish the work on Literotica. If you publish a work on Literotica to which you do not fully own the copyright, it may open you up to future legal repercussions.

That means "You cannot use AI because of the copyright issues." Which are very real. Currently, the USPTO won't register a copyright to you for works that were even partially written by AI. You have to renounce copyright on the AI portions. This strikes me as a ridiculous standard, but that's where we are.

I guess from Literotica's POV, there's the fear: what if the AI was regurgitating a copyrighted work? This strict policy against AI (and yeah, I think they have a very "strict" ani-AI policy) and their documented enforcement efforts to keep AI off the platform may provide a measure of protection again copyright claims.

And the content guidelines are also perfectly clear that they [Literotica] "DO NOT publish works" "generated by AI":

To that end, we DO NOT publish works of any type featuring the following content:
[...]
Works generated by artificial intelligence (AI), large language models (LLM), or other non-human automated systems. Literotica publishes works by human for humans. For more information, see our AI policy.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Interesting. I believe you have much more actual knowledge than my pure speculation, so I assume you are right, In trying to build a new mental model for me, I'm trying to understand why many of the purgatories end up as AI rejections (and occasionally content rejections).

My suspicion is the sheer volume of junk that must be going into the pending pile. If the, "My story has been rejected for suspected AI," threads are the tip of the iceberg, I'd say there's a huge horrible pile of actual AI junk beneath the surface.

I reckon we're hearing about those stories where folk have used Grammarly or equivalent, or their style is unfortunately, very like AI. What we're not seeing is the amount of junk that is probably being submitted - keep in mind the number of threads where people have asked, "Is it okay to use AI to help me write?" Been a bunch of them.

 

[SamBomb]

Mine has been pending since November 15th...