Story wrongfully rejected for "AI"

[TheHurtLiker]

I posted a story on this site a week or so ago and it was accepted with no issues. I submitted the second part of the story and it came back rejected with a weird message about AI usage. I've never used AI to write these stories, not even to check spelling or grammar, not at all, never ever. As someone who takes pride in my writing, this was really insulting and disheartening to get this message. I resubmitted it unchanged with a message attached saying it contains no AI assistance whatsoever. If it gets rejected again, I'm not sure what recourse I have. But this is outrageous. AI isn't just ruining stuff like this, it's ruining our society and I despise it.

 

[Mezu]

Same issue. I have a series here and got 45 chapters published, but the last 27 chapters got rejected for the same issue, now not even the edits of my previosuly accepted chapters can get through. And as I saw, a lot of other people got this issue, which began around 2025's September. Some people either get into a seemingly never-ending pending hell or get rejected after over a month of waiting.

 

[CrossedDestiny]

same boat, same river.

 

[yano2mch]

I'll say again, i think the rules are too strict. While i don't want to see stuff generated whole cloth, having assistance (especially spelling, punctuation, translation, etc) shouldn't be a disqualifying mark.

Though there's also book covers being marked as 'AI generated'.... that were done in like 2014....

Just saying, the detection tools are heavily biased, and probably wrong.

 

[TheHurtLiker]

I'll say again, i think the rules are too strict. While i don't want to see stuff generated whole cloth, having assistance (especially spelling, punctuation, translation, etc) shouldn't be a disqualifying mark.

Though there's also book covers being marked as 'AI generated'.... that were done in like 2014....

Just saying, the detection tools are heavily biased, and probably wrong.

I don't have a problem with people using it for spelling and grammar either, but in my case there was no AI usage whatsoever, so the only option here is to resubmit it and hope to not get the same result. I'm sure as hell not going to "edit" my story to be shittier and have bad grammar or something. Really disappointing to hear this is happening to a lot of other people. And it looks like there's no recourse for it either. Just another thing that AI is ruining. Really lame.

 

[SmilingLez]

I don't have a problem with people using it for spelling and grammar either, but in my case there was no AI usage whatsoever, so the only option here is to resubmit it and hope to not get the same result. I'm sure as hell not going to "edit" my story to be shittier and have bad grammar or something. Really disappointing to hear this is happening to a lot of other people. And it looks like there's no recourse for it either. Just another thing that AI is ruining. Really lame.

Your AI rejection puts you in good company. Running the Gettysburg Address through several different AI detection filters resulted in the speech being 100% AI generated

 

[TheHurtLiker]

Your AI rejection puts you in good company. Running the Gettysburg Address through several different AI detection filters resulted in the speech being 100% AI generated

Just spitballing here for fun, but what if I were to post a story with an introductory message full of misspellings and made up words for the express purpose of tripping up the AI detection?

 

[SmilingLez]

Just spitballing here for fun, but what if I were to post a story with an introductory message full of misspellings and made up words for the express purpose of tripping up the AI detection?

I've seen stories like that already posted so yes. Especially if you include an Arthur's node. Re place bolder wit boulder does wif dose, etc until your brain becomes ooey and gooey

Short sentences. can also work. Don't kneed to capitolize either. Tiepose r also gud.

Long run on sentences are usually good as well they tend to not read machine generated make sure you use pronouns and feelingx cuz AIs don't unless specifically asked

Lastly, remember since Lit is anonymous, no one can point you out in a crowd and say that, 'you are in illiterate idiot '.

As always, my opinion and YMMV

 

[TheHurtLiker]

I've seen stories like that already posted so yes. Especially if you include an Arthur's node. Re place bolder wit boulder does wif dose, etc until your brain becomes ooey and gooey

Short sentences. can also work. Don't kneed to capitolize either. Tiepose r also gud.

Long run on sentences are usually good as well they tend to not read machine generated make sure you use pronouns and feelingx cuz AIs don't unless specifically asked

Lastly, remember since Lit is anonymous, no one can point you out in a crowd and say that, 'you are in illiterate idiot '.

As always, my opinion and YMMV

This clearly is not your first rodeo. I salute you.

 

[DiscipleN]

I guess I should feel lucky. I'm so bad at editing my stories, they'll never be flagged as AI generated.

 

[SmilingLez]

This clearly is not your first rodeo. I salute you.

That is the advice given by other people as a hack.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Just spitballing here for fun, but what if I were to post a story with an introductory message full of misspellings and made up words for the express purpose of tripping up the AI detection?

Dumb idea. It would get rejected for spelling, not suspected AI.

People keep perpetuating the notion that you need to crapify the grammar and/or spelling in a story to avoid the suspicion of AI, to get past the AI bot. Not true.

What you need to do is not write something that reads like AI text. This is the bit that so many people seem to be missing. They keep protesting that they didn't use AI (and they probably didn't - or they used Grammarly and accepted its changes blindly) but something in the text is triggering the spotter, and that's what they need to deal with.

This is an unpalatable notion, sure, but when so many other stories don't trigger the spotter, what other conclusion can an outside observer arrive at, when using Occam's Razor? It's either AI artefacts which the writer doesn't know about, or it reads like AI text, both of which ping whatever dumb robot Lit is using.

I suspect many writers do use AI influenced check tools, because that's what they use in their day job, and don't know the implications here on Lit; and they haven't figured out that those tools were always hopeless for fiction, even before ChatGPT raised its ugly head.

 

[yano2mch]

I've seen stories like that already posted so yes. Especially if you include an Arthur's node. Re place bolder wit boulder does wif dose, etc until your brain becomes ooey and gooey

Short sentences. can also work. Don't kneed to capitolize either. Tiepose r also gud.

I wonder if getting rejected for being detected as AI is a good thing.

Think about it. People strive for perfection, we know we won't get there but we try.

But now you're getting flagged because your stuff is too perfect, too correct... So much so you have to introduce errors to be seen as less perfect.

I don't know. It's just really stupid we would have to do things like that.

Hmmm you COULD replace spaces with non-breaking spaces  , now i wonder how it will be with a story that's a single long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long sentence that runs off the page to the right.

 

[SmilingLez]

I wonder if getting rejected for being detected as AI is a good thing.

Think about it. People strive for perfection, we know we won't get there but we try.

But now you're getting flagged because your stuff is too perfect, too correct... So much so you have to introduce errors to be seen as less perfect.

I don't know. It's just really stupid we would have to do things like that.

Hmmm you COULD replace spaces with non-breaking spaces  , now i wonder how it will be with a story that's a single long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long sentence that runs off the page to the right.

I'm sure Abe Lincoln is rolling over in his grave knowing that the Gettysburg Address is 100% AI written

 

[TheHurtLiker]

ok

 

[TheHurtLiker]

Dumb idea. It would get rejected for spelling, not suspected AI.

People keep perpetuating the notion that you need to crapify the grammar and/or spelling in a story to avoid the suspicion of AI, to get past the AI bot. Not true.

What you need to do is not write something that reads like AI text. This is the bit that so many people seem to be missing. They keep protesting that they didn't use AI (and they probably didn't - or they used Grammarly and accepted its changes blindly) but something in the text is triggering the spotter, and that's what they need to deal with.

This is an unpalatable notion, sure, but when so many other stories don't trigger the spotter, what other conclusion can an outside observer arrive at, when using Occam's Razor? It's either AI artefacts which the writer doesn't know about, or it reads like AI text, both of which ping whatever dumb robot Lit is using.

I suspect many writers do use AI influenced check tools, because that's what they use in their day job, and don't know the implications here on Lit; and they haven't figured out that those tools were always hopeless for fiction, even before ChatGPT raised its ugly head.

Cool I just won't post here anymore because that's insane that someone would have to change their writing to appease AI. Cringe, lame, not doing it.

 

[ronde]

I wonder if getting rejected for being detected as AI is a good thing.

Think about it. People strive for perfection, we know we won't get there but we try.

But now you're getting flagged because your stuff is too perfect, too correct... So much so you have to introduce errors to be seen as less perfect.

I don't know. It's just really stupid we would have to do things like that.

Hmmm you COULD replace spaces with non-breaking spaces  , now i wonder how it will be with a story that's a single long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long sentence that runs off the page to the right.

I will admit that the only AI-type software I've used in my writing is the Word spellchecker, but after looking at Word's proposed grammar changes for several years, I can see the issue that's causing some people a problem.

It's not "perfection" that Lit is striving for with the various types of rejections. It's just to make sure anything Lit publishes is readable, and readable means readable by a wide range of people. That also means it should be written in "human-speak". Humans, even the most renowned authors of fiction, do not conform to each and every formal rule for grammar and punctuation. They write like people talk, not how people are "supposed" to talk. That's something AI can not do, because there are no hard and fast rules for how people really express themselves.

The answer is to read what you wrote and if whatever checker you're using suggests a change, to read the change and see if it sounds like you talk every day. It's even more important to see if the change keeps your characters the same people you started out with. It's too easy to change your easy-going average guy into a seeming PhD in Linguistics with one sentence, only to have him revert to your original character in the next piece of dialogue.

 

[SmilingLez]

I will admit that the only AI-type software I've used in my writing is the Word spellchecker, but after looking at Word's proposed grammar changes for several years, I can see the issue that's causing some people a problem.

It's not "perfection" that Lit is striving for with the various types of rejections. It's just to make sure anything Lit publishes is readable, and readable means readable by a wide range of people. That also means it should be written in "human-speak". Humans, even the most renowned authors of fiction, do not conform to each and every formal rule for grammar and punctuation. They write like people talk, not how people are "supposed" to talk. That's something AI can not do, because there are no hard and fast rules for how people really express themselves.

The answer is to read what you wrote and if whatever checker you're using suggests a change, to read the change and see if it sounds like you talk every day. It's even more important to see if the change keeps your characters the same people you started out with. It's too easy to change your easy-going average guy into a seeming PhD in Linguistics with one sentence, only to have him revert to your original character in the next piece of dialogue.

Exactly, that is why the Gettysburg Address was flagged as 100% AI generated, whereas the I have a dream speech was 0% AI generated (by zeroGPT's AI detection tool)

 

[yano2mch]

It's not "perfection" that Lit is striving for with the various types of rejections. It's just to make sure anything Lit publishes is readable, and readable means readable by a wide range of people. That also means it should be written in "human-speak". Humans, even the most renowned authors of fiction, do not conform to each and every formal rule for grammar and punctuation. They write like people talk, not how people are "supposed" to talk. That's something AI can not do, because there are no hard and fast rules for how people really express themselves.

I'm not convinced. Moving a comma at the suggestion of an AI and then the story getting flagged as AI, when you were just trying to get punctuation correct, nay perfect for the story/submission in question...

although you know i could totally do without using any punctuation whatsoever and be just fine in fact its perfect never having punctuation at all because i am not a machine and i dont need perfection and i cant end the sentance without a period but so what i guess ill keep writing without making fixes because fixes suggests perfection and perfection and correctness suggest ai usage and so does dashes and commas and periods and periods and periods maybe i can use something to replace a period but that would be punctuation what to do

 

[millamomud]

It's not "perfection" that Lit is striving for with the various types of rejections. It's just to make sure anything Lit publishes is readable, and readable means readable by a wide range of people. That also means it should be written in "human-speak". Humans, even the most renowned authors of fiction, do not conform to each and every formal rule for grammar and punctuation. They write like people talk, not how people are "supposed" to talk. That's something AI can not do, because there are no hard and fast rules for how people really express themselves.

My latest story was featured on the front page of another portal under "popular right now", after receiving lots of positive votes by the readers there, but sure, tell me my word piles aren't readable by a wide range of people.

 

[MountainLakes]

Eye jess rite like I wuz taut as a yung'un. Ann I ain never bin 'cused bein' no Aye Eye!

 

[BeechLeaf]

It's not going after good writing. There are lots of us who try to make our writing as good as possible, and we keep getting published.

Good writing includes natural dialogue, which has hesitations and breaks and so on. Good writing includes subtle variations that are beyond the ability of an AI.

 

[Britva415]

Just spitballing here for fun, but what if I were to post a story with an introductory message full of misspellings and made up words for the express purpose of tripping up the AI detection?

As a reader, I would nope-out of that. I wouldn't want to read something which is that obvious about trying to evade detection. It wouldn't look like you were trying to work around a flawed system which generates false positives, it would look like you were trying to work around an effective system which keeps genuine AI material from being approved and published.

 

[yano2mch]

I'd recommended adding empty wrapping html that won't be seen but would certainly take up tons of space blowing the size of your submission by 8x

l<i></i>i<i></i>k<i></i>e<i></i> <i></i>t<i></i>h<i></i>i<i></i>s

 

[ronde]

I'm not convinced. Moving a comma at the suggestion of an AI and then the story getting flagged as AI, when you were just trying to get punctuation correct, nay perfect for the story/submission in question...

although you know i could totally do without using any punctuation whatsoever and be just fine in fact its perfect never having punctuation at all because i am not a machine and i dont need perfection and i cant end the sentance without a period but so what i guess ill keep writing without making fixes because fixes suggests perfection and perfection and correctness suggest ai usage and so does dashes and commas and periods and periods and periods maybe i can use something to replace a period but that would be punctuation what to do

I've always found it interesting that for every complaint about an AI rejection, some frequenters of this board usually ask for a sample of the story, but that sample never seems to appear in a reply. It's always just, "But all I did was correct spelling and punctuation?. Just once, I'd like to see a post that details all the changes that happened during the spelling and punctuation correction.

The thing that flags me with Word are statements that start with "usually", "make sure", and the like. When I read the proposed corrections, they sound like a college thesis and not a short story.

As far as omitting all the punctuation, I guarantee any story written in that manner would be rejected.