Thats good idea but maybe we should keep it as lenient as possible or dont put names within the suspected since w arent sure yet if the content or written post are AI generated. It could be worse if we accuse someone of doing this and later on proven his innocent.
That's true. From now on we'll just post links with no names. With this exception: if you report a post for being "AI spam" and the report gets marked as Good, then share the archived version of the post here so we can get an idea of what "AI spam" looks like according to the mods.
I personally avoid using those detection tools because of false positive and (at least for now) I think that the sudden increase in English level is probably the best piece of evidence that we can provide to prove someone is using chatbot.
That's also true. Do we have an example of a false positive? I'd like to see a normal-written post that was detected as AI-written. What I have so far is:
1) sudden shift to perfect English is the #1 indicator
2) detection tools
can provide additional evidence if the majority of them indicate "probable AI," or >50% likelihood.
Of course running them through all 7 is too time consuming. Perhaps in the future we can narrow it down as we gain a better understanding of their accuracy.