Fix ai detection

1. 92

   melbelposted 22 months ago

   I was wrongfully accused of spinning an article and threatened with a ban. When I asked for clarification, I was told I used ai and then again threatened with a ban.
   
   I found an ai checker online and pasted one of the offending paragraphs in and it said 10% positive for ai. (So I guess 90% not ai??) I pulled a random paragraph from a Wikipedia article and it checked out as 20% positive for ai.
   
   I didn’t use a spinner or ai for my article and now I’m afraid to publish anything for fear of seeming like ai.
   
   I recommend fixing your detectors and being a little bit nicer with your wording, because I’m stuck here with 100s of articles that I’m now unpublishing so I don’t get banned. I don’t even know what to look for in my articles that might be flagged for ai.
   
   I even pasted a paragraph in a ai checker and when it came up positive, I tried to make it sound… I guess less computer-y (idk) and it scored an even higher positive for ai!
   
   Imo 10% like ai is not high. I mean, I suck at chess but if I were to play chess against someone, there is a chance I make the same move a computer might make… even if only accidentally because I suck. Like the first move might be a pawn or something and maybe a computer would have chosen a pawn first or something.
   
   TL;DR: Fix your ai checker and be a bit nicer.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Jan Stepanposted 22 months agoin reply to this

      A few weeks ago, I was also wrongfully accused of using AI in one of my articles. But the matter was very smoothly and professionally dealt with in a short amount of time.
      
      I am not saying this to defend anyone. Some of my articles that should be on niche sites still aren't there because some editors cannot do their work correctly, but I must say that the majority of them do a great job.
      
      It's all about proper communication. I am sure they will help you out. After all, we are all on the same team here.

      replyreport
   2. STAFF

      Matt Wellsposted 22 months agoin reply to this

      We have reviewed this article again and have published it. Apologies for the inconvenience.

      replyreport
2. 96

   eugbugposted 22 months ago

   I wouldn't unpublish. Any threat with a ban is a probably just a deterrent, possibly by editors who are just following instructions and guidelines. I would contact Haley Davis (You can do it through her profile) She's the Managing Editor. The issue is something which needs to be dealt with at a higher level. Also Angel Jennings is "Manager, Senior Editors" according to the staff list.

   replyreport
3. 95

   jansharesposted 22 months ago

   Melanie, this is awful. To be accused of using AI and threatened to be banned is pretty scary when you're innocent. If this is the way things are going now because of AI, we are in trouble. You've been here long enough and know the ropes. Sorry to hear you're going through this. I hope it resolves soon and successfully.
   
   Regarding veteran HP writers coming up AI+, is it possible that if some of the references used in research for articles came from sources that used AI, if that content (reworded from the original source) will be picked up by AI? In other words, creating a "false positive" for the use of AI.

   replyreport
4. 92

   melbelposted 21 months ago

   Thanks. I have edited it anyway. Honestly, I feel it reads better now, so really it was a win.

   replyreport
   1. 95

      jansharesposted 21 months agoin reply to this

      Good.

      replyreport
   2. 72

      Miebakagh57posted 21 months agoin reply to this

      Congratulations, Mdlbel. It's really a win.

      replyreport