Update content warnings to include AI usage

Theresaisnotmenhera

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2025
Messages
33
Points
53
As per Scribble Hub's content guidelines, stories that consist primarily of AI-generated content are prohibited, although the use of AI is not strictly banned. The pertinent rule states:

AI Generated Stories - Stories created mostly by AI will be rejected. You can use AI to help create your stories but most of the story should still be written by you.

However, the language used in this guideline is vague in defining what constitutes "mostly." This has led to the acceptance of several stories with a significant amount of paraphrased content or portion generated by AI, carrying clear voice and tones of AI rather than of a human writer. In light of the inability to filter these stories, it is suggested that a model similar to that of Royal Road be adopted. Royal Road currently employs two tags:

AI-Assisted: The author has used an AI tool for editing or proofreading. The story thus reflects the author’s creativity and structure, but it may use the AI’s voice and tone. There may be some negligible amount of snippets generated by AI.


AI-Generated: The story was generated using an AI tool; the author prompted and directed the process, and edited the result.

Regardless of whether the two are to be merged into one, a more concise language and updated content warnings would provide readers with necessary information and a greater ability to filter out unwanted material, including establishing a clearer policy for the site.

Note: Content warnings should not be needed if AI is a glorified thesaurus for you, for example.
 
Last edited:

Catnip

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2023
Messages
2
Points
18
Seeing any kind of AI-Slop on trending is disturbing to me, as AI in the creative sphere works solely as a parasite that steals the work of artists and authors of all kinds to generate copies so cheap in quality and so high in quantity they flood the market, drowning the genuine stuff under a wall of mud. If they then additional make you pay for that without telling you.. that is exactly the same crime as selling a fake Playstation 5 in my book.

Any hobby and interest I have that has been touched by AI has become worse. 3D-Printing, Reading, watching youtube, browsing for art..

I wish I could filter it out entirely. And I wish I could prevent anything I do from training AI.

AI has many areas it can be helpful and benefit humanity. The creative sphere suffers from it.

So flag it. Every single work. And if authors fail to do so after warnings, they should get removed from the front page and non-direct search function. If any social media website can shadow ban you for nonsense, why can't "we" do this to thieves? AI is theft by proxy. And it is about time we treat it that way..
 

Shelbie

Active member
Joined
Nov 22, 2022
Messages
7
Points
43
The Buggywhip manufacturers and slave plantation masters salute you. Stay the course. AI is as evil as electricity, hygiene, and the automobile combined!

AI-written content is crap. It always has been crap and it always will be crap. Guess what? 95% of DeviantArt 'art' was crap long before AI art was a thing, as was 95% of all written stories. If anything, AI has RAISED the quality of these uncreative brutes.

We don't need tags, what we need is for people who stumble across bad content to mark it as bad content. Why? no one is stupid enough to label their content as garbage, even if it is. 'recognizing' AI styles is one thing, but I have also read handwritten shlock that is every bit as poorly styled as AI junk.

And honestly, I love the way that AI artwork is clearing out all the complete nimrods from visual art with no talent that think they deserve to get paid like the next Boris Vallejo.
If your 'art' is poor enough that it can be replaced by AI, it deserves to be.
 

Theresaisnotmenhera

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2025
Messages
33
Points
53
The Buggywhip manufacturers and slave plantation masters salute you. Stay the course. AI is as evil as electricity, hygiene, and the automobile combined!

AI-written content is crap. It always has been crap and it always will be crap. Guess what? 95% of DeviantArt 'art' was crap long before AI art was a thing, as was 95% of all written stories. If anything, AI has RAISED the quality of these uncreative brutes.

We don't need tags, what we need is for people who stumble across bad content to mark it as bad content. Why? no one is stupid enough to label their content as garbage, even if it is. 'recognizing' AI styles is one thing, but I have also read handwritten shlock that is every bit as poorly styled as AI junk.

And honestly, I love the way that AI artwork is clearing out all the complete nimrods from visual art with no talent that think they deserve to get paid like the next Boris Vallejo.
If your 'art' is poor enough that it can be replaced by AI, it deserves to be.
I mean, sure. But that is not really a reason to not mark stories as such. The proposed change will just display basic information the reader may be interested in knowing, and if they don't mind, like it seems to be the case for you, virtually nothing is going to be any different.
 

Corty

The devil on your shoulder
Joined
Oct 7, 2022
Messages
3,522
Points
183
They will ignore ticking that box just as they ignore self-reporting that they post translations.

Just report them to be taken off the site altogether. No need for AI tags if there are no AI novels.
 

Theresaisnotmenhera

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2025
Messages
33
Points
53
They will ignore ticking that box just as they ignore self-reporting that they post translations.

Just report them to be taken off the site altogether. No need for AI tags if there are no AI novels.
I do imagine there would be significantly more opposition in that case. People are going to use AI whether we like it or not—which is not necessarily a bad thing. It's a tool; just that some use it worse than others (and I don't mean prompting). It seems a bit of a hardline stance to me from an amateur site to nuke those stories at the earliest signs of AI.

The reverse was also one of the points of contention that we do not know what counts as 'mostly,' and if the bar is set too low, the situation will be the same.

Not perfect, but this is the best I could think of.
 

Corty

The devil on your shoulder
Joined
Oct 7, 2022
Messages
3,522
Points
183
I do imagine there would be significantly more opposition in that case. People are going to use AI whether we like it or not—which is not necessarily a bad thing. It's a tool; just that some use it worse than others (and I don't mean prompting). It seems a bit of a hardline stance to me from an amateur site to nuke those stories at the earliest signs of AI.

The reverse was also one of the points of contention that we do not know what counts as 'mostly,' and if the bar is set too low, the situation will be the same.

Not perfect, but this is the best I could think of.
I don't mind nuking things that are against the rules.
However, the language used in this guideline is vague in defining what constitutes "mostly." This has led to the acceptance of several stories with a significant amount of paraphrased content or portion generated by AI, carrying clear voice and tones of AI rather than of a human writer.
You yourself quoted the rules. These stories are rejected here, and if they slip through, they have no reason to stay after being reported, as they should not have appeared at all in the first place. You have already defined what the "mostly" part means in that rule yourself. You can tell the story is AI-written by just reading it, and by default, it should not have been up on SH then.

Note: Content warnings should not be needed if AI is a glorified thesaurus for you, for example.
In your own case, you mention when it shouldn't even be counted as necessary to tag it, making it redundant. And once again, people won't use it as they already sneak past translations with no care of the rules. They don't even read the rules most of the time.
 

Piisfun

Playful Spacetime Dragon
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
316
Points
103
I don't mind nuking things that are against the rules.

You yourself quoted the rules. These stories are rejected here, and if they slip through, they have no reason to stay after being reported, as they should not have appeared at all in the first place. You have already defined what the "mostly" part means in that rule yourself. You can tell the story is AI-written by just reading it, and by default, it should not have been up on SH then.


In your own case, you mention when it shouldn't even be counted as necessary to tag it, making it redundant. And once again, people won't use it as they already sneak past translations with no care of the rules. They don't even read the rules most of the time.
To add to this: How many people actually check the content warnings?
Especially on mobile devices, where they are at the very bottom of the series page?

Unless there is some way of users enforcing it, and a change in how they are displayed, adding an AI content warning will have no effect.

While I would like to see the AI slop go away, especially the AI translation slop, this won't help much.
 

Theresaisnotmenhera

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2025
Messages
33
Points
53
To add to this: How many people actually check the content warnings?
Especially on mobile devices, where they are at the very bottom of the series page?

Unless there is some way of users enforcing it, and a change in how they are displayed, adding an AI content warning will have no effect.

While I would like to see the AI slop go away, especially the AI translation slop, this won't help much.
Admittedly, the intention of the post has nothing to do with decreasing the total number of AI stories or any kind of normative discourse. It simply seeks to label stories that are not AI-generated enough to have been deleted (additionally, needing clarification) but have traces of it nonetheless.

You can filter them out from Series Finder, though unfortunately not Release Filtering.
 

Lysander_Works

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2023
Messages
430
Points
78
I agree. The TOS should be updated with a more definite value. Maybe if more than 30% of the content is AI generated, as an example, and have a warning-tag to match. My initial concern is that, if people suddenly flood entries for AI generated books that aren't trying to use those tags, vetting them might become complicated, for the approval phase anyway. Maybe that's just paranoia? Eh, I still think it's worth trying. I have faith that registered readers who come across stuff like that would report the book and account for AI anyway, and proving whether it is AI is not hard anymore.

You can filter them out from Series Finder, though unfortunately not Release Filtering.
The initial post mentions how some may not make use of this tag in the first place, and how (without a clearer TOS regarding usage) some might get away with that. In other words, this isn't a call against using AI; it's a call against using AI and pretending not to use AI; at least, that's how I interpreted it.
Goona point out right here that I am not too well-versed in the understanding of how bad (or not bad) the current situation on this is. I personally do not come across too many AI generated stories, and the few that I do I simply black list.
 

Clo

nya nya~
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
228
Points
103
It's going to become nebulous drawing the line eventually.

Is using the magic wand in photoshop AI? Why isn't it?

Phone predictive texts? Because that's AI.

Spell checkers? AI. Professional editing software? AI.

Name generators? AI too.

So many writers use AI covers without a care, but get angry at AI writing, and vice-versa.

Honestly, most work on this site should have a "AI assisted me in some way."

At which point it becomes meaningless.
 

Valmond

Solem et Lunam: A Tragic Revenge Yuri Story
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Messages
616
Points
133
It's going to become nebulous drawing the line eventually.

Is using the magic wand in photoshop AI? Why isn't it?

Phone predictive texts? Because that's AI.

Spell checkers? AI. Professional editing software? AI.

Name generators? AI too.

So many writers use AI covers without a care, but get angry at AI writing, and vice-versa.

Honestly, most work on this site should have a "AI assisted me in some way."

At which point it becomes meaningless.
Putting my money on this one being AI. :blob_hmm_two:
 

Seaspecter

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2022
Messages
638
Points
133
Honestly, I don't really see the point in AI-generated content but I don't have any particular issue with it either.
 

Valmond

Solem et Lunam: A Tragic Revenge Yuri Story
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Messages
616
Points
133
Ya know, I remember there was a whole thing going around on Royal Road, where they were accusing a lot of peeps about their story being AI.

When in reality, the stories weren’t. I should know, I’ve been on there before the AI fear train started. :meowsip:
 

Theresaisnotmenhera

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2025
Messages
33
Points
53
I've been fearful about that too. I don't want to see the sort of witch-hunting accusations like I see on Twitter
 
Top