You don't see any response from them, even after posting a cautionary message mentioning them. They do not think such a warning post is anything to go by. They are proceeding as they wish. If they had any problem, they would have tried to contact you and asked for a chance later. Since they haven't responded yet, they won't take any action. They will continue to spread rumors, and you will report them. They won't think anything of it. It would be better to consider such users as garbage for the forum.
Only one or two users have contacted me throughout all these reports I've made, and about the same number has come forward or has tried to make things right in the AI report thread. The largest majority simply ignore the presence of the report and continue to their regular habits, unless they suffer consequences, such as losing their spot in their signature campaign.
I completely discarded that AI detector when I became convinced that it was doing far more harm than good. My advice is that no one who wants reliable detection should use it.
This is exactly why I use several detectors on the other forum (D.team). Sometimes just by looking at them we can tell there is something wrong with the results.
Currently using copyleaks, gptzero, undetectable AI, zero gpt, hive AI, scribbr, sapling, quilbot AI detector, in total 8. Some may think this is just too much. But I guess, it doesn't hurt be to absolutely sure whether we are unintentionally harming anyone innocent.
You guys know any other reliable tools?
[/quote]
I believe that's too much, while I also doubt that all 8 of the detectors you mentioned can accurately come up with the same result. In my opinion, the most accurate ones are Originality (paid, only a few credits for free) and Gowinston.ai (the same limitation with Originality applies), along with GPTZero and Copyleaks.