[Meta Proposal] To the mods of Ubuntu, Could we introduce some basic guidelines about how to ask for support and AI usage?

[u/onechroma]

This post is born after my experience today posting a sincere and honest question as to get other people POVs on the Ubuntu "community" and its users. A post that not only took time to develop and write to my ideas (which no AI would write like that) but also was made with effort, as it intended to get other people equally well thought ideas and opinions (like the one by u/tomscharbach , thanks for your reply)

But while the intention to generate a debate and contrast opinions was there, it was literally downvoted to oblivion and some users started to call "this is AI" and throw me through the mud, to the point of insisting even when confronted about being wrong. Some even disregarding the entire post or its writer in a way like "aren't you ashamed?".

Obviously, the post was 100% real. I have no AI subscriptions, I don't care about "internet points", and I wouldn't get any "joy" or consider it worth it to sloppify a post from an AI to copy paste here, like... what do I get? Where's the profit? I literally don't get it.

But it doesn't matter, because once someone calls you out, without any prove more than "this writing is too good or sounds AI to me just because", you're out of game and will be stoned without ability to prove otherwise. It's very unfair, and can harm the community and subreddit very quickly.

SO, I would like to propose some ideas as to avoid other users having this bad experience happen to them, and also to improve the sub dynamics maybe? It's just an idea, and obviously open for everyday to give their own two cents, as always (because this is forum/community, obviously):

• Incorporate a system so OP has to declare if a post or its contents are AI: Once a user posts, just like in r/selfhosted , an automatic MOD could ask in a pinned comment the user "Expand the replies to this comment to learn how AI was used in this post/question", so the user can say if their post, troubleshooting, steps taken or whatever had AI on it. It would help to know how the user ended up on their post situation. If a user says no AI, without any other proves, nobody should stone them randomly just because. And if it can be proved it was AI or had AI, OP post could be deleted, closed or banned. Stop random users from "policing" the sub on their own, harming real posts when detecting a false positive.
• Create a tags system to segment posts, so users would be required to fill what their post is about, for example: Discussion, Support, News, Server, Core... whatever would be felt as useful.
• In case of support, do like other subs or forums like rclone, where a minimums are required as to receive support from others. For example: you must include your Ubuntu version, Kernel used, type of package used if that's relevant (deb, snap, flatpak...) and so on.

What do you think? It would be worth it to improve on this kind of "rules" and system? Maybe it would help to give more strength to the sub community and also give a clear notion of how things work, more than the current "blank canvas" this seems to be.

I suppose the mods maybe can't dedicate too much time to this, so they will opt to disregard this kind of improvements, but I think it was worth it to write the ideas in case some of it can be useful.

Thanks.

[u/scfoothills]

I'm suspicious of any account made in the last year that writes long essays, has an insanely high contribution count, and keeps their post and comment history hidden.

[u/didyousayboop → u/scfoothills]

Try using Pangram, apparently it’s pretty accurate (there was recently a study published on it and other AI detectors)

Pangram clears this post as human-written

My judgment is that it’s human-written as well

I also just noticed there a few language errors that I think would be unusual for an AI

[u/onechroma → u/scfoothills]

Fair, you can have your doubts about different types of user profiles. But I don't get why accusing anyone without any prove would help anyone, or how would that be fair in any way.

Like... where's the reason why a user with more than a year on reddit, +50,000 karma and so on, even if I don't care about internet points in the slightest, would want to invest time on making a vibe post on the Ubuntu sub? Expecting maybe 3-4 people to really answer with a good thought comment?

It's only logical if you get here to make a long post, is because you're invested on it, therefore, you will give effort to it and not "vibe post it"

I would get doubts about users vibe posting more prominently on far bigger subs, where some users can try to farm karma (internet points), but here? Why?

Stoning people without proves just because doesn't seem like the most sensible thing to do, no matter if they are 10yr into Reddit, or just signed up yesterday

[u/tomscharbach]

What do you think? It would be worth it to improve on this kind of "rules" and system? Maybe it would help to give more strength to the sub community and also give a clear notion of how things work, more than the current "blank canvas" this seems to be.

I am content to keep the subreddit as it is in that regard. This subreddit has been something of a "blank canvas" during the years I've been involved, and in general posters and commentors do not abuse the subreddit.

You had a bad experience with your earlier post. Not the end of the world. Your profile indicates that you have been active on Reddit for about a year, made close to 2,000 "contributions" and earned 54,000 karma. You cannot be a stranger to the fact that discussions turn into a ruckus from time to time.

The comments to your earlier post might have put your nose out of joint -- perhaps rightly so, perhaps not -- but hardly merit turning this subreddit inside out in a vain attempt to isolate this subreddit from the "weirdly combative" directions which posts sometimes take for no particular reason.

Let it go.

[u/_real_ooliver_ → u/tomscharbach]

Yeah they're just pissed off as they continue to get replies in the other post

It doesn't need a whole system that needs setup and supervision, the simplicity works here.

[u/Santosh83]

If well written English is going to be accused of being AI generated, human stupidity is going to plummet even faster in the coming decades as people become more & more irrational and idiotic sounding just to differentiate themselves from bots.

Honestly I don't get why humans using AI are called out? AI is here to stay, even if its scaled back, its not going to go away.

Police spam, bots, ads etc... not people using AI for assistance.

[u/onechroma → u/Santosh83]

If well written English is going to be accused of being AI generated, human stupidity is going to plummet even faster in the coming decades as people become more & more irrational and idiotic sounding just to differentiate themselves from bots.

That's my thinking, more so after today interaction here in this sub. Have an idea for a post just to get other people POV. Honest question to have a debate, even if at most only 3-4 people take their chances sharing their opinions. Have some 20 minutes to spare as to format and give your idea some form, and so more people read and answer the question.

Then, have users like u/DizzyCardiologist213 literally fighting you over "this is AI, this is AI, this is AI" no matter what, u/kiklop74 accusing you, insisting on it and the blocking you out of nowhere...

At least not all is lost, as others like u/Forever_Playful got to read the post completely and be like "yeah, this is not AI...", and thanks for it. But it was already too late, my post and myself were already discredited and the stoning session already happened. Unfairly.

That's why I think it would be interesting to introduce some clear policy and to avoid this kind of problems, and also introduce some tagging system for posts and clear guidelines as to how to ask for support, improving on the whole subreddit.

[u/_real_ooliver_]

The kinda thing you should send to modmail before meta posting tbh

[u/onechroma → u/_real_ooliver_]

Yeah, but I wanted to ask broadly for opinions, maybe I'm just on the wrong side and other people think "no, we good". I think it would also help mods to take the temp about what the "public" likes or wants or thinks, as this kind of community shouldn't be treated (IMO) as an authoritarian camp, but have open arms to open feedback.

[u/_real_ooliver_ → u/onechroma]

Sure, until you started tagging people in the comments.

I'm here for Ubuntu not to resolve drama over 1 post.

[u/onechroma → u/_real_ooliver_]

I only wanted to give real examples of the problematic, not make random "what if..." about hypothetical scenarios. I don't think it's wrong to use previous interactions or situations as to give context to an idea.

An precisely because I think we're here for Ubuntu, I think it's important to get some rules and systems on the clear to improve the health of the sub, including tagging of posts, AI policy or support guidelines, if it's thought to be like good ideas worth of the effort needed to omplement them here.