AI content concerns and solutions
Hi Friends,
Recently, we've (a few folks in the forums) realized that ChatGPT an artificial intelligence (AI) program has been used to provide both reviews and poetry content.
While we don't have anything against people using tech to expand horizons, we find this something that needs to be addressed. Immediately.
What are your thoughts?
We have AI here. We can't beat the poetry that's generated when admitted in contests. We can't beat the reviews that are generated.
So we have steroids at the Olympics.
How would you like to address this, as a community?
So far, we think asking for policy that folks using AI identify the content as such, and that content is excluded from contests.
We have discussed asking if we can add an AI tag and category, and asking for policy.
What are your thoughts? Where would you like us to go with our requests?
LURVE YOU!
B
Recently, we've (a few folks in the forums) realized that ChatGPT an artificial intelligence (AI) program has been used to provide both reviews and poetry content.
While we don't have anything against people using tech to expand horizons, we find this something that needs to be addressed. Immediately.
What are your thoughts?
We have AI here. We can't beat the poetry that's generated when admitted in contests. We can't beat the reviews that are generated.
So we have steroids at the Olympics.
How would you like to address this, as a community?
So far, we think asking for policy that folks using AI identify the content as such, and that content is excluded from contests.
We have discussed asking if we can add an AI tag and category, and asking for policy.
What are your thoughts? Where would you like us to go with our requests?
LURVE YOU!
B
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Betty said:Hi Friends,
Recently, we've (a few folks in the forums) realized that ChatGPT an artificial intelligence (AI) program has been used to provide both reviews and poetry content.
While we don't have anything against people using tech to expand horizons, we find this something that needs to be addressed. Immediately.
What are your thoughts?
We have AI here. We can't beat the poetry that's generated when admitted in contests. We can't beat the reviews that are generated.
So we have steroids at the Olympics.
How would you like to address this, as a community?
So far, we think asking for policy that folks using AI identify the content as such, and that content is excluded from contests.
We have discussed asking if we can add an AI tag and category, and asking for policy.
What are your thoughts? Where would you like us to go with our requests?
LURVE YOU!
B
Betty thank you for taking this AI generated content issue over to the Suggestions thread as we hopefully come together and decide as a community how we should move forward.
My suggestion is that any content that is reported to a mod as being suspected of being bot generated, and therefore not the original and authentic creation of the person posting, should be treated the same as plagiarism. With the rules of governance that are already in place for plagiarism applied to bot generated content, we can transition into a feasible means of addressing this new aspect of posting to the site. As such, what I'm asking the site to do is:
Amend the site rules to include the posting of AI generated content, the consequences for posting AI generated content, and enforce those consequences in the same manner as the mods enforce content that is decided to be not written by the person whom posted it, ergo, treat chat bot content as plagiarism.
By our current rules, we can quote someone else's writing, but the entire post cannot be someone else's content, it has to be original content by the person posting it.
The reasons for this are that this site rewards people with trophies for posting poems and critiques. People posting content they did not write themselves should not be allowed to win trophies we are supposed to be awarded for original content.
The ethics for surreptitiously posting AI generated content should be considered the same as for plagiarism. The difference being, we can definitively point out the original posting of plagiarized poetry, with chat bot generated content, we have to take a different approach.
I have demonstrated how AI generated content follows patterns of context that can be reasonably predicted by the zerogpt website. If the site moderators believe, within a reasonable margin of doubt, that content posted to this site has been generated by an AI, I believe the person whom posted it should be treated as if they have plagiarized their content.
I hope our fellow members will weigh in on this subject and that appropriate measures will be taken to restore the integrity of our posts, poems, critiques, contests, awards and trophies.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Recently, we've (a few folks in the forums) realized that ChatGPT an artificial intelligence (AI) program has been used to provide both reviews and poetry content.
While we don't have anything against people using tech to expand horizons, we find this something that needs to be addressed. Immediately.
What are your thoughts?
We have AI here. We can't beat the poetry that's generated when admitted in contests. We can't beat the reviews that are generated.
So we have steroids at the Olympics.
How would you like to address this, as a community?
So far, we think asking for policy that folks using AI identify the content as such, and that content is excluded from contests.
We have discussed asking if we can add an AI tag and category, and asking for policy.
What are your thoughts? Where would you like us to go with our requests?
LURVE YOU!
B
Betty thank you for taking this AI generated content issue over to the Suggestions thread as we hopefully come together and decide as a community how we should move forward.
My suggestion is that any content that is reported to a mod as being suspected of being bot generated, and therefore not the original and authentic creation of the person posting, should be treated the same as plagiarism. With the rules of governance that are already in place for plagiarism applied to bot generated content, we can transition into a feasible means of addressing this new aspect of posting to the site. As such, what I'm asking the site to do is:
Amend the site rules to include the posting of AI generated content, the consequences for posting AI generated content, and enforce those consequences in the same manner as the mods enforce content that is decided to be not written by the person whom posted it, ergo, treat chat bot content as plagiarism.
By our current rules, we can quote someone else's writing, but the entire post cannot be someone else's content, it has to be original content by the person posting it.
The reasons for this are that this site rewards people with trophies for posting poems and critiques. People posting content they did not write themselves should not be allowed to win trophies we are supposed to be awarded for original content.
The ethics for surreptitiously posting AI generated content should be considered the same as for plagiarism. The difference being, we can definitively point out the original posting of plagiarized poetry, with chat bot generated content, we have to take a different approach.
I have demonstrated how AI generated content follows patterns of context that can be reasonably predicted by the zerogpt website. If the site moderators believe, within a reasonable margin of doubt, that content posted to this site has been generated by an AI, I believe the person whom posted it should be treated as if they have plagiarized their content.
I hope our fellow members will weigh in on this subject and that appropriate measures will be taken to restore the integrity of our posts, poems, critiques, contests, awards and trophies.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKopy74weus
I'm a warrior of the finest order I am ready
admittedly I'm frightened I am a home girl....
I'm a warrior of the finest order I am ready
admittedly I'm frightened I am a home girl....
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Your flip-flopping is fucking with me Cath.
Pick a side.
And yeah. I have proof. I ran six of the offender's poems through the generator and came up with nearly identically formatted analysis that I posted on his shit.
Daniel has offered substantial evidence in one of my poems.
This isn't about proving, and it's not about pointing fingers, it's saving the fucking art. That's all. ChatGPT weakens our community. OUR community, right here.
We are living on borrowed time. How to we extend it?
Anonymous said:<< post removed >>
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Betty said:
Your flip-flopping is fucking with me Cath.
Pick a side.
And yeah. I have proof. I ran six of the offender's poems through the generator and came up with nearly identically formatted analysis that I posted on his shit.
Daniel has offered substantial evidence in one of my poems.
This isn't about proving, and it's not about pointing fingers, it's saving the fucking art. That's all. ChatGPT weakens our community. OUR community, right here.
We are living on borrowed time. How to we extend it?
As to the burden of proof,
As this is a social site governed by rules that are enforced by moderators, we accept a certain amount of latitude when it comes to the decisions these appointed site moderators make. This is precisely why I have worded my prospectus of this issue as, within a reasonable margin of doubt. Membership here is a privilege, it is not a right. We maintain our privilege of membership by upholding the ethics and rules of posting to this website. Bearing this in mind I reiterate, If content is suspected of being AI generated and reported as such and/or a moderator should decide within the purview of their mandate that content has a likelihood of being AI generated, that content should be treated as content that is not original or authentic to the person whom posted it and that person should be treated in the same manner as a person is treated for posting plagiarized content.
Your flip-flopping is fucking with me Cath.
Pick a side.
And yeah. I have proof. I ran six of the offender's poems through the generator and came up with nearly identically formatted analysis that I posted on his shit.
Daniel has offered substantial evidence in one of my poems.
This isn't about proving, and it's not about pointing fingers, it's saving the fucking art. That's all. ChatGPT weakens our community. OUR community, right here.
We are living on borrowed time. How to we extend it?
As to the burden of proof,
As this is a social site governed by rules that are enforced by moderators, we accept a certain amount of latitude when it comes to the decisions these appointed site moderators make. This is precisely why I have worded my prospectus of this issue as, within a reasonable margin of doubt. Membership here is a privilege, it is not a right. We maintain our privilege of membership by upholding the ethics and rules of posting to this website. Bearing this in mind I reiterate, If content is suspected of being AI generated and reported as such and/or a moderator should decide within the purview of their mandate that content has a likelihood of being AI generated, that content should be treated as content that is not original or authentic to the person whom posted it and that person should be treated in the same manner as a person is treated for posting plagiarized content.
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
