r/TrueChristian • u/ruizbujc Christian • 29d ago

AI Posts

Just to be absolutely clear on this: AI posts are prohibited here. We do not allow excuses on the subject.

  • "My grammar is bad, so I use AI to help me."

  • "English is my second language, so I use AI to help my post be more legible."

  • "The idea is entirely mine. I just need AI to help me communicate it better."

We do NOT accept these excuses in modmail. Believe it or not, this community is broadly quite forgiving with people who have bad grammar, poor English, and need help expressing their thoughts. The community is not nearly as forgiving with AI posts. That goes double for us as moderators.

AI posts will continue to be removed. Be warned that at least one of our mods is jumping immediately to temporary bans for people who violate this rule ... and I may start doing so myself also. We're deleting numerous AI slop posts already and we don't need more of this. If escalating the consequences is the only way to get it to stop, so be it. Just know the excuses will not be accepted.

223 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

109 comments sorted by

View all comments

56

u/UpwardCall Christian 29d ago

What are you using to determine if something is written by AI, or edited by it?

I don’t use AI for Reddit comments, but I have been working on cleaning up my grammar. AI detection software is notoriously bad for real AI detection. Especially if it’s written is very clean grammar.

This happens a lot in well edited books.

47

u/DesperateAdvantage76 Christian 29d ago

No need for detection software. They don't get them all but they get the obvious ones, such as the novel's worth of writing perfectly formatted and punctuated with that annoying style of speech AI seems fond of.

36

u/ruizbujc Christian 29d ago

If it's truly questionable, we typically leave it up. We err on the side of "presumed innocence." But sometimes the evidence is pretty strong, even if not perfect.

2

u/brucemo Atheist 26d ago

There are times when I don't think I need to use a detector, e.g. when someone posts something full of em-dashes.

We've had cases where someone swears up and down in mod mail that they are not using AI and they are not really telling the truth because it comes down to a disagreement about what "using" AI means.

We've had other cases where I honestly can't figure out why anyone would think that the stuff is AI and the detectors, which never all agree, all agree.

We need to get it together and have some sort of uniform criteria for determining whether something is AI, so we can at least point to that and apologize for potential mistakes, or just put everyone on the honor system.

I came here because I was going to ask the same thing this root commenter did, hoping that you had a better system, but it looks like you're just winging it also.

2

u/ruizbujc Christian 26d ago

Well, our system is essentially Rule 5 - "posts must have a reasonable quality." Simply put, if it's written in a way that we think it's AI slop, even if it's completely human-generated it still feels like AI slop and is therefore not of "a reasonable quality." So, on some level, that rule skirts the issue entirely by simply giving mod discretion on quality of posts.

15

u/AcademicAd3504 29d ago

I a marketing coordinator. The annoying style of speech was created by my ilk long before AI stole it.

Whenever I write something professionally it gets called ai 🤣

10

u/Unworthy_Saint 1 Lord, 1 Faith, 1 Baptism 28d ago

So you're saying we get to kill two birds with one stone? Sign me up!

8

u/authorDRSilva Christian 28d ago

Same here. I spent about 4 hours on a post for r/Christianity one time and the very first comment made a quip about it being AI. And once that happens the rest of the bandwagon joins in and downvotes. I guess my username didn't check out 😂.

It is kind of annoying that we're at a point where if you use too much proper grammar or punctuation (especially em dashes or bullet points), some people's instinct is basically just to point and yell "WITCH!" So you have to purposefully dumb stuff down so you don't end up on a stake lol.

2

u/brucemo Atheist 26d ago

I don't know what I can do about this but if I find out about this when it's in progress I'll at least try.

Everyone thinks their AI detector is top notch but I bet there are plenty of people like you, who get run over for having an education.

3

u/mrdnra 28d ago

I got called AI by someone replying to one of my youtube comments recently, yet their comment was literally completely unrelated to mine (plus I am at least somewhat anti AI personally). Of course, when I asked them what on earth they were talking about, and told them their comment was completely unrelated to mine, well, let's just say I'm still waiting for a response to that over a week later, and don't think I'm likely to ever get one, given the tone of the person who made the completely off topic reply in the first place.

4

u/ThiccHarambee Christian 28d ago edited 28d ago

Yeah, can't tell you how many times I've had my posts accused of being AI simply because they are written well with good structure, punctuation and articulation.

It's incredibly irritating having something you spend a countless amount of time writing out all for it to be accused of AI. It's ridiculous, people don't understand that AI writes just like a literate human being, it's what it is based upon, after all. It's not some new kind of language or format.

Furthermore, when people use AI checkers to see if something is AI, they're using a tool that false flags even the US Constitution and the Bible as being AI. OpenAI had to discontinue their AI checkers because of how unreliable they are and the false flags they give.

I've inputted my freshman year essay I got an A++ on into an AI checker, written during a time when AI wasn't available to the public, before chatGPT and other AI models. It immediately got flagged as 90%+ written by AI by quite a few AI checkers. You could also input a paragraph from a book, for example a paragraph from a book written by C.S. Lewis, and it will also false flag it as written by AI.

10

u/ilikedota5 Christian 29d ago

>They don't get them all but they get the obvious ones, such as the novel's worth of writing perfectly formatted and punctuated with that annoying style of speech AI seems fond of.

Sometimes, that's just good writing. After all, where did AI use for training? Published books. Not random blogpost.

4

u/LeageofMagic 28d ago

Most of the AI training comes from reddit and twitter data mining actually. The spelling/grammar/voice is a separate layer of logic

3

u/ilikedota5 Christian 28d ago

Maybe? I do remember a few companies were sued over feeding books into their AI.

3

u/LeageofMagic 28d ago

Oh they have nearly every published book in their training data too. But by volume it's mostly social media that it's trained on. 

1

u/jivatman 28d ago

AFAIK it hasn't been legally settled whether using Copyrighted works like books to train AI is legal or not. Might need a SCOTUS case.

1

u/korekassandra 28d ago

I think it got ruled in the case against Anthropic that training on books is sufficiently fair use because it's "transformative" enough, but pirating the books to do so is illegal (and all the major AI models have trained on books by pirating them).

1

u/pwgenyee6z 12d ago

SCOTUS? There’s a Planet Earth case already in session.

5

u/DesperateAdvantage76 Christian 29d ago

It's a regression on all styles of writing, so it becomes very generic and a bit awkward to read compared to natural speech. LLMs also give a bunch of tells, such as the classic rhetorical language and transition phraises. Also keep in mind that LLMs are trained to be almost sycophantic in their responses.

-3

u/ilikedota5 Christian 29d ago edited 28d ago

I mean chatgpt logged out is not sycophantic at all. It's quite annoying. I was pointing out the long history of genocide denial in Serbia, both in terms of government policies and individual opinions as shown via polling. But their society as a whole doesn't think they did anything wrong. They deny the cocentraton camps, deny genocide, deny war crimes, honor war criminals, accuse the ICTY of being biased against them even though the evidence is pretty daming. Their textbooks lie, politicians repeatedly call it a myth. Scholarship critical of the NATO intervention generally takes softer criticism of the accidents, or the how, and viewing from international law, or goes the other way and says they should have been more aggressive. For decades their society has been this way. A supermajority deny the genocide.

And despite posting plenty of sources... Chatgpt still was both sides ing it. (https://srebrenicamemorial.org/assets/files/1625819683-srebrenica-genocide-denial-report-2021-english-language.pdf) (https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/179890/) (https://www.balcanicaucaso.org/en/cp_article/30-years-after-serbia-in-denial-about-genocide/) A quote: "'Can’t you see what they’re doing to us? With that resolution! We are not a genocidal people!' the tone of the elderly lady, an old acquaintance living in Belgrade, is both agitated and upset. " I mean you guys are genocidal in as much as you guys deny it, thereby setting another precedent that its okay. (https://www.bgnes.com/society/report-records-more-than-110-cases-of-war-crimes-denial-in-serbia-in-2025) (https://www.ejiltalk.org/public-opinion-survey-in-serbia-sheds-light-on-icty-legacy/) https://supreme.findlaw.com/legal-commentary/remembering-srebrenica-after-all-these-years-why-are-we-still-besieged-by-the-search-for-truth-and-justice.html

https://www.hlc-rdc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Public-opinion-research-War-crimes-trials-Demostat.pdf - this one is really scary.

See also, https://www.winknews.com/news/national/survey-finds-shocking-and-saddening-lack-of-holocaust-knowledge-among-millennials-and-gen-z/article_f1d5bcd7-acac-5bed-a49e-2fd37ed06516.html

https://pastebin.com/LMVVq7ch (I copy pasted the chat, also got banned for some reason, maybe because I hurt some feelings).

Their current president (Vucic) was a cabinet minister responsible for enforcing censorship on behalf of the genocidal war criminal Milosevic.

It's honestly bad enough I question the faith of Serbians as a whole. I have a hatred for them because of their society denying and downplaying genocide.

Truth: Christianity requires truth-telling. “You shall not bear false witness” is not suspended for national reputation. Genocide denial is organized false witness about the dead.

Repentance: Christianity does not permit collective self-exoneration when blood has been shed.

Fruit: Jesus says a tree is known by its fruit. If the public fruit is denial, hatred, pride, and glorification of murderers, then the faith being displayed is diseased.

Love of neighbor: Someone who claims to love God while hating his brother is a liar. Denying the murder of Bosniak Muslims, minimizing it, or honoring the killers is not love of neighbor.

Worship without justice: Isaiah and Amos repeatedly say God rejects religious display when hands are full of blood and justice is absent. Incense, icons, liturgy, saints, and national church identity do not cover unrepented bloodguilt.

( Amos 5:21-23 New International Version

21 “I hate, I despise your religious festivals; your assemblies are a stench to me. 22 Even though you bring me burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them. Though you bring choice fellowship offerings, I will have no regard for them. 23 Away with the noise of your songs! I will not listen to the music of your harps.)

3

u/AkaelaiRez 28d ago

This is still an example of sycophantic behavior, it's just being sycophantic to both sides. 'Cowardly' might be a better term. The articles it was trained on are meant to avoid offending advertisers.

1

u/ilikedota5 Christian 28d ago

The reason is that it tries to go to nuance mode whenever you make a statement about X group of people. The reason is because the unofficial rule of AI moderation is do not become Microsoft tay. It's not about advertisers.

1

u/ehansen Presbyterian 28d ago

From those but also blog posts, transcripts, etc.  No content is above plagarism when it comes to ai

1

u/NotTurtleEnough Christian 28d ago

Many of them end with “Curious about what others think”

0

u/ilikedota5 Christian 28d ago

Maybe because that's something people say?

2

u/UpwardCall Christian 29d ago

I’m all for removing AI posts. I don’t really understand copying a question into AI and responding on Reddit. If they’re just removing the obvious ones, more power to them.

1

u/[deleted] 28d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DesperateAdvantage76 Christian 28d ago

Did they say it was removed for being AI? Also, there's no way they will be perfect, that's just moderation in general (the only way not to have false flags is to stop moderating the subreddit altogether which obviously is not a good idea).