The new AI Rule.

[KingsDen]

While hugeblack and a vice president has said 80%, you said 50%.

Just to clarify I'm not a vice president, hair is currently VP. I'm the 2nd President in the context of Freemind being the 5th. Carry on...

Thanks for the clarity. Without explanation, i had thought that a second president in a general context should be the vice president.

Let me quote what admin wrote in one of the sticky.

- You can use AI, as long as it's not above 30%.

Well, the admin is lenient already on this. The leniency will undoubtedly open rooms for exploitation and in the end the issues will be treated on case by case basis.

[Z-tight]

Many AI detection tools report false positives on posts that's passed through them, so such tools cannot be trusted. I understand that some detection tools are more efficient and reliable than others in detecting posts created by a chatbot, instead of a human.

So maybe a combination of the most reliable tools is the best option to find out if a post was written by the human behind an account.

[Jokers]

So maybe a combination of the most reliable tools is the best option to find out if a post was written by the human behind an account.

Maybe. But I'm not going to discuss in the public on which tools do we use so that the rules breakers can't try to avoid detection by checking if the needed tools give than false negatives. As for me, I try to give a benefit of a doubt each time there can be a doubt. Main goal is not to punish someone but to make the communication on the forum friendly and comfortable for mostly all, except bad actors.

[Asiska02]

Some translation or grammar tools can make the post seem like AI wrote it, but I believe no tool will give it more than 20% of AI-generated text.

Most popular ones don't. I tested Grammarly, Google Translate, Yandex Translate, DeepL and some more. The result of their work doesn't give AI detection. The problems were with those who said they used AI bots not to write texts, but to translate or improve them... well, I can say only: don't use AI bots for any purposes on forum posts.

Have you tested Grammarly  of recent again. Results from there at a time was showing AI detected, this may have happened after they’ve updated certain things in their back end and integrated AI into their database. I feel they’ve started generating AI integrated post after spinning the words. That’s what is trending, so most apps are integrating it now.
If there was a need for an AI in the forum, we could just be asking questions and AI bots, not humans will be given the reply.

[Jokers]

Have you tested Grammarly  of recent again. Results from there at a time was showing AI detected, this may have happened after they’ve updated certain things in their back end and integrated AI into their database. I feel they’ve started generating AI integrated post after spinning the words. That’s what is trending, so most apps are integrating it now.

Please give an example of a text which is just went through Grammarly, wasn't written by AI and is detected as AI written. I'll look through it.

[bayu7adi]

For me, anyone who has used AI and is detected 100% in just one post, deserves to get the "AI" badge. Just one 100% accurate AI post can be a reference for everyone, that maybe some other posts also contain AI, right?

Then, for this AI badge, it can be removed if within a period of 2 weeks or maybe 1 month or 2 months of activity he does not use AI again to post here... it will be very tiring to check it, but it is fairer, because the period of forgiving mistakes cannot be done quickly... just think of the badge as a punishment and campaign managers can consider it as something as a participant screening criterion.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Some translation or grammar tools can make the post seem like AI wrote it, but I believe no tool will give it more than 20% of AI-generated text.

Most popular ones don't. I tested Grammarly, Google Translate, Yandex Translate, DeepL and some more. The result of their work doesn't give AI detection. The problems were with those who said they used AI bots not to write texts, but to translate or improve them... well, I can say only: don't use AI bots for any purposes on forum posts.

Have you tested Grammarly  of recent again. Results from there at a time was showing AI detected, this may have happened after they’ve updated certain things in their back end and integrated AI into their database. I feel they’ve started generating AI integrated post after spinning the words. That’s what is trending, so most apps are integrating it now.
If there was a need for an AI in the forum, we could just be asking questions and AI bots, not humans will be given the reply.

I have Grammerly on my laptop computer, and I set it up in a way it automatically corrects words and sentences as I type, though for several months now, Ive not actually accessed the forum using the laptop due to the convenience using my mobile device offers me.
But I am kind of surprised at this your claim, you tell to tell me that if now, I decide to post on this using my laptop, several of my post, or maybe all of the ones I posted using the laptop will be flagged as Ai generated posts simply because Grammerly auto corrected a few of the sentences that were used wrongly and few words I spelled wrongly?

This is hard to believe, and I possibly will have to verify this myself.

[dragononcrypto]

Then, for this AI badge, it can be removed if within a period of 2 weeks or maybe 1 month or 2 months of activity he does not use AI again to post here... it will be very tiring to check it, but it is fairer, because the period of forgiving mistakes cannot be done quickly... just think of the badge as a punishment and campaign managers can consider it as something as a participant screening criterion.

Regarding implementation of the badge, then I imagine this would be the case. If a user wanted to appeal the badger after a week or two of not using AI then it would be fair to have the badge removed. Assuming the only reason for using AI would be to increase rank and join signature campaigns, the badge in itself should be punishment enough to avoid being accepted into such campaigns. I can't think of another good reason why ranking up with AI would be beneficial otherwise.

[KingsDen]

Then, for this AI badge, it can be removed if within a period of 2 weeks or maybe 1 month or 2 months of activity he does not use AI again to post here... it will be very tiring to check it, but it is fairer, because the period of forgiving mistakes cannot be done quickly... just think of the badge as a punishment and campaign managers can consider it as something as a participant screening criterion.

Regarding implementation of the badge, then I imagine this would be the case. If a user wanted to appeal the badger after a week or two of not using AI then it would be fair to have the badge removed. Assuming the only reason for using AI would be to increase rank and join signature campaigns, the badge in itself should be punishment enough to avoid being accepted into such campaigns. I can't think of another good reason why ranking up with AI would be beneficial otherwise.

1. After a certain period of time, the victim applies for AI badge lifting and if after going through the users profile and it is gathered that the user changed, the tag would be removed. That's nice... But what happens if the user continued using AI after getting a second chance.

2. Increasing rank and joining signature campaigns could be the major reason of using AI to write. But we should not disregard other reasons as ;

• To earn positive Karma faster
• To appear more intelligent or knowledgeable than they are.

Sounds funny, but people do som

[dragononcrypto]

Then, for this AI badge, it can be removed if within a period of 2 weeks or maybe 1 month or 2 months of activity he does not use AI again to post here... it will be very tiring to check it, but it is fairer, because the period of forgiving mistakes cannot be done quickly... just think of the badge as a punishment and campaign managers can consider it as something as a participant screening criterion.

Regarding implementation of the badge, then I imagine this would be the case. If a user wanted to appeal the badger after a week or two of not using AI then it would be fair to have the badge removed. Assuming the only reason for using AI would be to increase rank and join signature campaigns, the badge in itself should be punishment enough to avoid being accepted into such campaigns. I can't think of another good reason why ranking up with AI would be beneficial otherwise.

1. After a certain period of time, the victim applies for AI badge lifting and if after going through the users profile and it is gathered that the user changed, the tag would be removed. That's nice... But what happens if the user continued using AI after getting a second chance.

They would end up having the AI badge returned, likely receive a strike, and otherwise being moderated in the misbehaving group would make sense to moderate future posts. Reality is most users who request a second chance avoid making the same mistakes again, especially after knowing how easy it is to get caught, so this isn't a major concern.

[bayu7adi]

They would end up having the AI badge returned, likely receive a strike, and otherwise being moderated in the misbehaving group would make sense to moderate future posts. Reality is most users who request a second chance avoid making the same mistakes again, especially after knowing how easy it is to get caught, so this isn't a major concern.

Yeah...or maybe the punishment for those who repeat the same mistake intentionally, can be increased, where the user is given a badge longer than the badge given when the previous violation. I think this is quite fair, because the majority of them are indicated to meet the posting quota too, so they use the easiest way to immediately complete their tasks, but with AI and making robot posts is not something special ... so the AI ​​badge warning can also be considered by the relevant campaign manager to process it according to its provisions.

[NotATether]

Regarding implementation of the badge, then I imagine this would be the case. If a user wanted to appeal the badger after a week or two of not using AI then it would be fair to have the badge removed. Assuming the only reason for using AI would be to increase rank and join signature campaigns, the badge in itself should be punishment enough to avoid being accepted into such campaigns. I can't think of another good reason why ranking up with AI would be beneficial otherwise.

And there are much better ways to rank up quickly than using AI. If somebody tried to put a few posts inside ChatGPT in order to attempt to continue the conversation with some natural-sounding post, they'd quickly pull out all their hairs because it turns out it is not as simple as it's commonly thought to make such a post, as they will all sound out-of-touch with the rest of the topic. It requires some tweaking of the prompt to make it at least fit in.

[dragononcrypto]

They would end up having the AI badge returned, likely receive a strike, and otherwise being moderated in the misbehaving group would make sense to moderate future posts. Reality is most users who request a second chance avoid making the same mistakes again, especially after knowing how easy it is to get caught, so this isn't a major concern.

Yeah...or maybe the punishment for those who repeat the same mistake intentionally, can be increased, where the user is given a badge longer than the badge given when the previous violation.

A strike would be an increased punishment, as the only realistic way to have strikes removed is to pay $5. It's very unlikely you will be accepted into good quality (paying) signature campaigns with a strike.

[KingsDen]

They would end up having the AI badge returned, likely receive a strike, and otherwise being moderated in the misbehaving group would make sense to moderate future posts. Reality is most users who request a second chance avoid making the same mistakes again, especially after knowing how easy it is to get caught, so this isn't a major concern.

Yeah...or maybe the punishment for those who repeat the same mistake intentionally, can be increased, where the user is given a badge longer than the badge given when the previous violation.

A strike would be an increased punishment, as the only realistic way to have strikes removed is to pay $5. It's very unlikely you will be accepted into good quality (paying) signature campaigns with a strike.

I wonder how the strike looks like because I haven't seen one before and where is it placed? Maybe in the same position as the badges, and what will differentiate a strike from a badge.
There are way too many badges already in some people's profile which could actually make it indistinguishable from a strike.

[NotATether]

I wonder how the strike looks like because I haven't seen one before and where is it placed? Maybe in the same position as the badges, and what will differentiate a strike from a badge.
There are way too many badges already in some people's profile which could actually make it indistinguishable from a strike.

They should put the strike on top of the forum profile picture, along with the rest of the rank data, unless they plan to make the strike badge a very bright color that will make it stand out among all the other badges, because I also share your worry that maybe people will somehow fail to see that this user is on a strike.

But there is a text that says that, right? So that should cover it.