Post
Topic
Board Meta
Re: What's AI Written Post?
by
jokers10
on 18/11/2023, 09:59:26 UTC
I'm curious (and may open my own poll about it shortly), is there anyone who believes that posting unaccredited AI text isn't plagiarism? It seems to me the general consensus is yes, it is plagiarism, but I am potentially biased because that's what I believe as well.

Aside from one famous example (and kudos to Royse777 for his no-AI policy), I rarely see accounts removed from campaigns after getting caught posting AI. This could be because campaign managers are largely unaware of it happening -- usually at most people will leave a neutral trust rating for the offense, if anything at all.

So AI posters exist in a legal loophole right now:

- its often hard to know 100% for sure that a post is AI-generated
- its not considered plagiarism by moderator standards (as of the moment)
- there's no precedent for red tagging users for doing this.

Well, if we'll look at the definition of the word "plagiarize" from Merriam-Webster dictionary, I guess there hardly can be a double understanding of if taking a text written not by you without crediting its source (even if the source is AI) is plagiarism or not.

If it's not a catch phrase, then crediting the source (including AI) is something expected.

So I guess that moderators don't always take action against AI users because there can be a problem in case of appeal on ban. If there is a text with a date from an outer source, you can easily check it any time. But there's no generally accepted standard for AI texts. We can see that cheaters try to use many different tricks to try to say that it is a mistake in AI detection. Sometimes what is obvious is not what is easily proved. Undecided