I was rejected for AI-generated content

Jump to Last Post 1-21 of 21 discussions (120 posts)

67
PaulGoodman67posted 2 years ago
I’ve been experimenting recently with ChatGPT. In this case, it looks like I didn’t do enough work on the article to improve and humanize it.

The speed of rejection and wording of the email suggests that it was auto-detected.

I don’t know whether to be upset or cheered that the software rejected it. Probably the latter! Haha!
report
1. STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I moderated your article for spun content. We have systems in place to detect artificially generated content. Spun content includes:
  
  *Automatically-generated content
  * Content created with the aid of a translation tool or an article spinning tool
  * Homoglyphs used in place of English language characters
  
  Please review the Newsletter about using AI.
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Matt, this is interesting. I am not a coder, so I am having a hard time understanding the use of homoglyphs to detect AI or spun content.
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Homoglyphs are characters that look like English language characters but are not. It's a form of spinning. It's not used to detect AI.
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Oh! Thank you!
  report
84
EricDockettposted 2 years ago
This is the second time you have been accused of being a robot in the past couple of weeks.

If you start publishing articles that are nothing but a string of ones and zeros it will be confirmed.

Seriously, while that sounds pretty annoying, it is good that HP has a system in place relatively quickly.
report
1. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, it's good they can detect. It probably means that sites like Google and Medium have detection software too.
  report
69
eugbugposted 2 years ago
Was there any reason mentioned for the rejection?
report
1. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  The reason was:
  
  "Your article has been unpublished because it is an artificially generated article or links to artificially generated content."
  
  It was a generic email, with links to the HP terms of agreement, etc. I assume it's an updated version of the "spun content" generic email (although I've never received that one).
  
  I did use some ChatGPT help, parts of the article were written entirely by me but other bits were reworked AI content. I obviously didn't do enough.
  
  I'll try doing more work on it and resubmitting. I guess I was being too lazy.
  
  I'm encouraged that HP has detection powers, though.
  report
86
Jodahposted 2 years ago
This is actually a positive outcome.
report
1. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I agree. There's obviously going to be an arms race between AI-generated content and publishers. I was worried that publishers might lose the first round but apparently, they're prepared.
  
  I was reading somewhere that people are using AI to create and sell ebooks and sites like Amazon are getting flooded. I don't know how true that is.
  report
  80
  JerryFisherposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  A few weeks ago also experimenting with A1 and with no contribution from me, within days of Chat writing it for me, I had an article edited by HP for grammar etc, then featured straight away, then like yours suddenly unfeatured along with a warning.
  The curious thing to me was that HP were on top of grammar from Chat! As soon as it was featured I thought I was onto a good thing and I wrote another ten articles, all around 1200 words, and all were struck down at the same time - with a warning. I'll never use Chat to write another article on HP.
  Obviously HP do have some detector in place now and there is a serious risk of being banned.
  report
  67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, multiple infractions risk a ban. It sounds like you were publishing pure AI-generated content. I was mixing it up but clearly, I didn't do enough in this case.
  
  My article was unpublished within hours of me submitting it. Although I guess technically, it wasn't "unpublished" as I don't believe it was ever published.
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Right, infractions do risk a ban. I've personally banned many accounts for abusing AI and will continue to do so.
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Good for you, Matt.
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  la la la la chat gpt is awful
  ya can't success with it.
  it gotta got ya outline contents
  but ya got to spun and mingle all
  with the human soul and touch.
  LA la LA LA be careful with chatGpt.
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, we do have systems and processes in place to detect AI. If we don't catch offenders right away, we will eventually.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Here: https://medium.com/@curiousmatrix/first … 52a3439dc3
  
  Also see this comment by Matt here:
  https://hubpages.com/forum/post/4281295
  report
  83
  jansharesposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you, Misbah. The Medium article is disappointing as I'm working my butt off on my second book, a book of poetry. What does this mean for those of us who write poetry organically from our souls? AI is here to stay and widely accepted, apparently, regardless of the genre. It seems to be the newest tool/toy of intrigue, curiosity, convenience, literary productivity and money.
  Also, glad you posted the links to the forum where Matt basically gave the okay to use AI and ChatGPT on HP for "research." I guess we can see how that's going, with Paul and Jerry sharing their experiences with rejections.
  Please excuse my tone on the subject. I'm trying to be nice, but I feel my old school, non-techy, old-fashioned self is seeping in between these lines, lol.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Haha! Janis, I undersand your frustration. I will publish an article using AI to test how HP detectors handle content with human co-writing and rephrased sentences. I think relying solely on AI may not be ideal, but using it as a tool can be helpful. For example, using AI for research articles can save time, but copying and pasting without human input is problematic. It's crucial to involve human writing to ensure quality and human minds to maintain our own sanity. Although I haven't written anything on HubPages for a long time, I will write and publish something soon to explore this issue further.
  Much Love and Blessings! ❤️
  
  Edit: I am not sure if Paul and Jerry have already written an email about their rejected articles to HP editors, but I believe it could be beneficial to question the validity of Matt's response to my comment on the other forum about using AI-generated text... It may be helpful to do so cos it seems that the HP staff is not following this thread.
  report
  83
  jansharesposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for your reply, Misbah. Yes, HP's position needs to be clarified. Thanks for the heart emoji. Love it!
  report
  80
  JerryFisherposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Misbah - It was actually Matt who rejected my articles after all had been featured by HP. He was pretty wild about it. "Your article has been unpublished because it is an artificially generated article or links to artificially generated content. Depending on the severity of the violation, you may or may not have the opportunity to revise your article."
  I wrote back referring Matt to their newsletter some time back where in fact they were promoting ChatA1 and also said - 'So, just to clarify, as writers are we no longer able to use A1 or can we use it sparingly? Little confused on this as I sure don’t want to get an outright ban. Might be an idea for Matt in the forum to make some announcement over what your new rules are on this.'
  Matt replied "Please review the newsletter: https://hubpages.com/about/newsletter/2023-01-25
  We never said to copy and paste AI articles to HubPages.'
  
  I wasn't too sure what Matt meant by copying and pasting directly as each A1 article it writes is presumably original, if not spun a little. And there wasn't anything in the newsletter to my knowledge warning against this. But the message was quite severe so I just said I won't edit the articles I'll just delete them. I honestly don't know if they have some kind of detector or not. I doubt it. A1 has a way of robotised writing that I think an editor could spot and become suspicious. As A1 is really based around questions and answers, it would be easy enough to then put the writers question into Chat and a virtually, if not exact answer should come up, the same as what they're editing.
  Anyway, after been on here for years, to read 'possible permanent ban' was scary enough to never think of A1 again here on HP. Simply not worth the risk. A1 is so good though that the risk is that an original article could be flagged as A1.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I am just reading your comment, Jerry! But first, I want to let you know that please don't worry about any ban; I was threatened with the same warning as well. (not for any duplication or AI-generated text but due to some bickering on the forums)
  I will answer you shortly; you are just questioning, and questioning something you don't understand isn't wrong, my friend!
  report
  80
  JerryFisherposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Right now, I don't see an original article being banned for AI. If that does happen, I am sure there is recourse. Honest writing is honest writing. If HP detects AI, they are serious about no AI content.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I wonder how serious they are, maybe not very clear yet, but it was Matt who said this to me: "That's right, Misbah. As you said, HubPages will not have any issues with writers using it if the content is not copied, and can help writers to produce better content."
  
  https://hubpages.com/forum/post/4281295
  
  The above quoted statement is questionable; I think
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yes. It's questionable. "How does AI help writers produce better content?" should be delineated more.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  But the staff don't like to be questioned anyhow
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Ouch!
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Please review the Newsletter about the proper use of AI. My statement above means: Don't use AI to create articles. Use it to help create articles.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Hello Matt, Perhaps we need more help in understanding how it can be used to help us in creating better articles. Thank you for responding.
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  The answer can be found in the Newsletter
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Okay! Thank you very much, Matt! Got you! We can only take inspiration and ideas, but we cannot use the text
  Just one question: Do we need to credit it if we use it for ideas?
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Credit isn't necessary.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Great! Thanks for making it clear!
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, Matt. I got it.
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Keep in mind that just because an AI article might be "original" or not be duplicate content, it is not a genuine article. It is considered spun content.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I think HP is not yet very clear about what they want from AI. AI can produce text per your suggestions; if you are a creative writer and give it a plot, I wonder how HP's system will detect it. Co-writing, I think, can exist! Yes, directly copy-pasting is not the correct way, I believe. I was too much involved in the HP community, and I invested my heart and soul in this platform, but when I received a temporary ban and was further threatened with a warning about a permanent ban, I stopped publishing here.
  I may make peace with those due to whom I received the ban and those who reported me, but I actually believe HP should be careful before they ban their writers. The writers here are GOLD and DIAMONDS! Priceless!
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  You mentioned your AI article was "original" and "spun" a little. Artificially generated content has never been allowed on HubPages. This is what we consider spun content:
  
  * Automatically-generated content
  * Content created with the aid of a translation tool or an article spinning
  tool
  * Homoglyphs used in place of English language characters
  
  Refer to the Newsletter for proper AI use.
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  If you publish a test article, read the Newsletter first. You don't want your article to be moderated for Spun/Artificially generated content.
  report
  86
  Jodahposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I read an article that had links to mainly children’s picture books (apparently easiest for AI to write entirely) on Amazon, that freely stated that both text and images were AI created. The books got mostly bad reviews, but I wonder if that would have been the case if readers were not aware they were AI written.
  report
2. 84
  viryaboposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Absolutely.
  report
83
jansharesposted 2 years ago
Did you do it to test HP, Paul? Sounds like you're saying you used AI intentionally to see how it worked but were surprised that it was detected.
report
1. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I've been attempting to use AI in the way that HP advised, as a writing tool. I wasn't deliberately trying to flip the switch.
  
  I think I just got too lazy and nonchalant. It seems that my article contained too much pure AI content.
  
  I wasn't approaching it in either a scientific or nefarious manner. It was just something that happened.
  
  While I was unaware previously whether they had AI detection or not, I'm now interested to know how the software figures out what's AI-generated and what isn't, but that's another story.
  report
  78
  theraggededgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I've only used it for titles and outlines and even then I don't follow the suggestions slavishly. If I do get it to expand on anything, I completely rewrite it and resist copying and pasting. Basically, exactly how HubPages enthusiastically encouraged us to use it in their newsletter a few weeks back.
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Good to know.
  report
81
Brenda Arledgeposted 2 years ago
I think it's a bit of a relief to know that Hubpages actually caught the AI.
report
1. 83
  jansharesposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  +1
  report
  67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I suspect that it's like the plagiarism detector. It will let writers get away with so much. Cross the line, though, and it sounds the alarm.
  
  I remember not long after I joined HP, I got flagged by the plagiarism software. I was technically within my rights, as I was quoting lyrics from an old traditional folk song not covered by any copyright protection, but the detector didn't know that.
  
  I was so alarmed by the email threats of getting banned, I deleted the entire article immediately!
  report
2. 85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  The thing is that AI ChapGPT is good for content generation. Then put them in your words every word of the content.
  That done write your story further in your words
  I'll do later as I suggested when I've registered with chapgpt site.
  Thank you.
  report
82
Rupert Taylorposted 2 years ago
This is a great relief. I no longer have to spend the early part of my day reporting articles about science and technology in education that I suspect are AI generated.
report
83
Kenna McHughposted 2 years ago
This is good news! AI has no soul. I hope other platforms follow suit.
report
1. 84
  viryaboposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I really hope so too.
  report
2. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  AI is pretty soul-less but I'm not sure that much can be done about it. It's a bit like when people started wearing manufactured clothes instead of homemade ones once the industrial revolution happened.
  
  More recently, digital technology started removing all the interesting quirks from pop music and made it more synthetic and monotonous. It's rare to hear a change in tempo, off-beat or off-key note, or a key change nowadays.
  
  I think that writing will go a similar way. Grammarly is already contributing to this phenomenon, but things will get much worse.
  
  In the future, the written word will seem perfect. But as Leonard Cohen sang, it's the cracks where the light gets in!
  report
85
Miebakagh57posted 2 years ago
@JerryFisher, while I got you wrong about a month ago. I was completely right. AI is no use here. Can you recalled our discussion in the HubPages sponsored thread?
I realized others are now being more aware.
Chap gpt generated contents with human 'soul' can still fail one because the whole skeleton was AI generated, and the TIN (Turnitin) software will go against every skeletal. PaulGoodman67, ya using AI? Just a test or a realty? It mislead you to think that all should be well. You've learn your lesson I think. Thanls.
report
73
Amit Kumar 98posted 2 years ago
Thank God! The future of writers is still safe.
report
1. 78
  theraggededgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  It's safe? My earnings have dropped from almost $1k per month to a couple of hundred. Nothing 'safe' about writing unless you are a JKR or Steven King.
  report
  73
  Amit Kumar 98posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Oh really!
  
  What is the reason behind the plunge in your earnings?
  report
  78
  theraggededgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Falling traffic, low CPM, too much advertising on HP platform, too much competition, or maybe having all my best articles stolen.
  
  A combination of all of the above, I expect. We're all experiencing the same things. If you spend time in the forum, you'll see all our gripes.
  report
  73
  Amit Kumar 98posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  True, these are the challenges at present. Despite these challenges, we have to find our ways and consistently drudge to bring improvements. Artificial Intelligence (AI) like Chat GPT may act as a facilitator but can never substitute human beings.
  
  Let's go ahead positively.
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  This is sad and needs to be remedied by HP staff. Writers are doing our best to rectify the situation, but please, Matt, or some other HP staff, give us some hope!!
  report
  73
  Amit Kumar 98posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Let's hope for the best!
  report
  67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I think that there's still a longer-term threat to certain types of factual writing, though, from AI.
  
  People will likely stop Googling certain things and stop going to websites for answers. Instead, they will just ask AI and it will give them a direct answer.
  
  It will be interesting to see how Google and Bing intend to make money out of AI. The current business models for search don't generally seem workable.
  
  When I worked in libraries, Google effectively killed off all of the reference sections and a big chunk of non-fiction, while fiction survived.
  
  AI will kill off certain types of online writing, I suspect or at least suck out all the earning potential for writers.
  
  Of course, new opportunities may also arise. The death of certain library services opened up opportunities like online content writing.
  report
69
eugbugposted 2 years ago
I wonder is the output of ChatGPT filled with any sequences of non-visible Unicode characters that Hubpages can recognise and identify text as AI-generated? Like timestamp headers for instance? It would be interesting to put your original article through a utility that makes these visible, or a hex editor.

I came across this interesting article on the subject of watermarking.

https://www.searchenginejournal.com/cha … rk/475366/
report
1. 83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  This would be if you copied and pasted the AI content. Right?
  report
  69
  eugbugposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yes. If content is pasted to an editor first and saved as plain text, any non ASCII characters would be removed from the saved content.
  report
  67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I suspect it's the detection of hidden word patterns. Computers can detect patterns that humans don't see.
  
  You're okay if you do a lot of rewriting.
  
  Of course, some people will rewrite something when they don't understand the subject matter, which is bad, but they could already do that before AI by copying and pasting and then rewriting.
  
  You can certainly stop people from just copying and pasting most or all of the whole thing, though, just as you can stop people from plagiarizing most/entire articles.
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  If that's the case, AI will not prevail as the replacement for honest writers. Though, I use it for research as a starting point.
  report
  67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  That's just my opinion at a certain point in time.
  
  This isn't an end-point, though, it's the beginning of something that will evolve and go on for some time. It's unpredictable where things will end up, I think.
  report
85
Miebakagh57posted 2 years ago
Certain here among us being banned in the forum are either being ignorant, or being report to team for bad mouthing their seniors and mentors, or breaching HubPages rules. When I was banned for the first time some 5 years ago, it was my ignorance and that doesn't excused me. On the next ban 2 years later I protested and it was lifted to restored my forum previleges. Now I was very careful to learnt the rules. Yes, AI is really welcome here, and Hubpages is very clear whether one use it or not.
report
1. 75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Miebakagh, I'm delighted to hear from you. Can you elaborate on the clarity of using AI on HubPages? What are some reliable resources? Please backup your info; I'd like to learn more
  And I left HubPages for good; I am happy where I am now, and I am doing well!
  I don't have any issues with anyone; if some people reported me at the time, I reported them as well, and both parties were banned, but I didn't like being threatened; we're writers, and for me respect matters the most.
  
  Just one more thing: the people who supported me and continue to support me outnumber those who reported me, and for me, only those who love and support me matter! I love them and I love them madly
  report
  86
  Jodahposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you so much, John! Words cannot express my feelings or my gratitude for all your love and support. You are one of the main reasons behind my success today; your thoughtfulness is greatly appreciated, my friend! Friends like you make life worth living. I admire you so much! ❤️
  report
  86
  Jodahposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  It has always been my pleasure to encourage and support you, Misbah. I am always here for you.
  report
  75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you so much, my friend! You are the best!!
  report
85
Miebakagh57posted 2 years ago
That's great and good news!
report
85
Miebakagh57posted 2 years ago
Those insisting on using AI to write their articles, instead of using the device as an aid will pay dearly for their errors.
report
1. 75
  Misbah786posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I firmly believe reporting every time doesn't work. We got answers anyhow, so thank you. Best wishes!
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Please report suspected AI content. I will review the account and ban if necessary.
  report
2. STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Correct!
  report
83
jansharesposted 2 years ago
Please listen to this video/read article. I watched this story on 60 Minutes last Sunday. It's an eye-opening exploration of the truth (flaws and potential misuse) about the use of AI and Chat GPT. Be careful that you are not dancing with the devil.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … r-AA18g1wZ
report
69
eugbugposted 2 years ago
Interestingly I just read an article on Medium about an increasing flood of incoming articles to a publication. They use OpenAI's AIdetector, but it often can't determines whether an article has been AI generated.
report
1. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I think some people are seeing it as an absolutist, black-and-white thing but that's not how I see it.
  
  At the end of the day, HP has human editors so they can reject stuff that's low quality or not suitable which is the main thing. As long as the niches are protected, it's fine.
  
  The biggest issue really is the veracity of the content and that was a thorny issue even before AI.
  
  A lot of my HP articles are now effectively hybrids, a combination of my own words plus AI generation with lots of rewriting.
  
  I see the detection as being mainly about stopping people who are churning out pure AI-generated material that they don't understand, either the content or even sometimes the English language.
  
  I agree that it's a form of deception to say that you wrote something that was purely AI generated but it's not always so clear-cut. For instance, the article I had rejected only used some AI help but was rejected. Other articles that used AI help have fared better.
  
  There was obviously too much AI for the detector in this case but a little less might have gotten through. That's why I tend to suspect it's like the plagiarism detector. It's fairly crude and there's a little leeway.
  
  I'm just speculating, though, based on my experiences.
  
  Obviously, stuff that's pure AI generated should be rejected but everything else is a grey area.
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  My thinking is this; will these guys and gals, who have absolute confidence in AI generated contents repose the same absolute confidence in a a robotic bus/car or train driver?
  report
83
Justine Guiaoposted 2 years ago

Have you seen this?
report
1. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  There is no release date for GPT-4 that I'm aware of.
  
  At best this FB meme appears speculative and vague. The dramatic language and hyperbole suggest that it's spam that's attempting to capitalize on the current interest in AI.
  
  AI will continue to develop. However, I'm generally wary of using social media memes as a source of info.
  report
2. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I stand corrected. There is a new version out now, which is discussed in another thread.
  report
  83
  jansharesposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yup, it's out. I was just watching a news report (CBSN Livestream) about its improvements. However, the expert said although it's more "conversational" it still makes mistakes because it pulls info off of Wiki, internet and social media and will still need more work and oversite/regulation.
  report
67
PaulGoodman67posted 2 years ago
I've now reworked the article and resubmitted it. The article in question is in another account, not this one.

I have some ideas on possible detection methods for AI but I'm reluctant to discuss them in a public forum. Some people might use the info nefariously.

Anyway, one lives and learns and hopefully, the article will be accepted this time around! I certainly believe that I've substantially improved it.

AI promises to be a steep learning curve that's difficult to avoid.
report
1. 78
  theraggededgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  While I find it very helpful for getting my thoughts in order and making suggestions for outlines and content, there's no getting away from the fact it's still bloody hard work to thrash an article into shape
  
  And for what? Falling views and income ::sigh::
  report
  67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yup! And Medium's maybe even worse!
  report
  78
  theraggededgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  It is! And it was going so well
  report
  83
  jansharesposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I joined Medium at the wrong time. I thought I'd be getting earnings for all articles I've posted since I joined and got 100 followers. I've been getting .11 here, .9 there. I admit I never read the small print. I'm almost as discouraged with Medium as I am with HP.
  report
  67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  It seems that when Ev Williams threw in the towel and left, he took all the money with him!
  
  I joined Medium right at the tail-end of the good period. It felt exciting because each time you published something, there was chance of it taking off and earning you hundreds of views and dollars. They were also giving bonuses away of up to $500 when I joined.
  
  It's certainly not like that now!
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I though of joining Medium a year ago. But being European concentrated, I was told that it was impossible for an African (I'm a Nigerian) to join unless I resides in a European country, or travel to register in any European country that I may have acquitance.
  report
  78
  theraggededgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Medium is an American site.
  
  I think you can be from anywhere but it's the payment program that might be an obstacle. Medium uses Stripe.
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Bev, so Medium is American site? I though it was Europe. Thanks for the information. By the way why is Stripe so hard? Thanks.
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  And for that same reasons, a single article I wrote early Janaury this year is yet to be publish by me. Presently, I found it odd to wrrite at most 3 reads a month as I usually did.
  report
78
theraggededgeposted 2 years ago
One article... over two months. There are quite a few others around the $100 to $200 mark.

Nowadays it's more like a dollar a day, if that.
report
1. 67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  This sounds like a familiar story. I've heard some writers at Medium complain that they've been shadow-banned. I actually think everyone's suffering.
  report
67
PaulGoodman67posted 2 years ago
Oh boy, I've been rejected a second time! That's worrying as I put in a lot of work adding original material, deleting AI-generated content, and doing a lot of rewriting.

I did write to HP editors but no reply so far.

I guess I will wait to see if I get a response from HP. It would be good to get some sort of guidance, the generic rejection letter doesn't help much.

I feel a little wary of submitting it a third time.
report
1. 69
  eugbugposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I've just used ChatGPT to write a new article, but I really used it just for inspiration for a guide about ten ways of doing a DIY task. Then I wrote the text in my own words. It still hasn't been featured though after a few days, which is a bit odd.
  report
  67
  PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I wouldn't have submitted it a second time without being pretty confident that I'd done enough work for it to be accepted. So I'm a little shocked, to be honest.
  
  At least at the niche stage, you get rejected by a real person. This is rejection at the publishing stage by a machine with a generic explanation. Hopefully, an editor will reply to my email.
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Review the Newsletter about AI.
  report
  78
  theraggededgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, but it only gives two suggestions. Are those the only ways in which Chat AI can be used? Because, from what I can tell, the possibilities are endless. And I don't mean using it to write actual articles.
  
  Perhaps HP should publish concise guidelines so we know where we stand.
  report
  STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  The Newsletter has the current guidelines.
  report
  83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  I use AI as a starting point. Even then, I deviate from it's outline because inevitably I find better sources.
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Good gal!
  report
  83
  jansharesposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  +1
  report
2. 85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Stupid AI GPT generated contents that are not really smart enough! Critically and sensibly, the best writers can woven and cloth a(n) AI gpt generated facts in their own best words to no avail. The AI seems also to create a frame, a sort of inhuman soul, which writers spun their words and best thoughts into but it does not help matter. Foolish gpt generator. I don't need ya help. Those who use you, you'll make a Pinochio out of them all. 'Oh, how are you fallen again, PaulGoodHead! How are your story cut down to the level of the plagiarist! The Mighty that use Chat gpt will likewise fell'. Stupid and mischief making charp gpt.
  report
  78
  theraggededgeposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Good grief.
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  lol!
  report
3. STAFF
  Matt Wellsposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Don't email editors when you receive an email about violating HubPages rules. Send emails to team@hubpages.com. Continued abuse of AI will result in account restrictions or a ban. Review the Newsletter about using AI.
  report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Matt, you're very resourceful in a complicated issue as in dealing with a case like PaulGoodman. Thank you. You're actually more in the boot of predecesor.
  report
69
eugbugposted 2 years ago
I see it's just been featured now.
report
1. 83
  Kenna McHughposted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Interesting!
  report
2. 85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this
  Featured? Should we sing 'amazing grace'? I'll rather sing 'Beast of England, Beast of Ireland, Beast of every land and Clime'
  report

Closed to reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

I was rejected for AI-generated content

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

I was rejected for AI-generated content

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies