|
Everything looks to be the good track! Just to ask a clarifying question: Regarding the specifics of: quote:Do not make low-effort dumps of your AI-generated stuff in other TG threads. That includes but is not limited to: character portraits, maps, character sheets, adventure ideas, your one-on-one chatlogs with an AI, and more. Too many posters hate this stuff and so it invites a hostile reaction, extended irresolvable debates about the ethics, and lots of reports for mods to deal with. This means high effort posts as deemed by the mods would be fine? So as an example if I post like a 500 (hand typed) word Let's Play about how a session went, but happened to include some AI generated images for portraits, but say some hand drawn maps together; this would probably be fine?
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2023 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
Antivehicular posted:Yeah, I should clarify that this is still under a lot of scrutiny from the mods. If this topic starts to degrade the creative culture of the forums, or if AI fans get really into bear-poking "here's my dungeon writeup and CHECK OUT THREAD COOL MIDJOURNEY ELVES I hope this is kept with fairness in mind, like I feel like the intent here should be to be open in their use of AI; for example suppose I sketch a character or 3D model the base of the character myself, but then I use AI to finish the render which I use in my NPC portrait. I'd think the intent is to be open about this and mention as part of the larger post, "Yeah I used some AI to help me with part of this output." Especially even if AI is only a small tiny part of the process, and I mention it to be transparent but in a non-confrontational way; if someone reacts excessively negatively to it I hope the mods take context into consideration and don't treat this as the AI user disturbing the peace when they checked every box and did what could to act in good faith. Same goes if someone is reasonably civil with their response even if its a criticism, "I wish you didn't use AI but otherwise fun post." then of course the expectation should be to let it go and not argue the point.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 00:23
|
|
" poo poo with otherwise okay posts, I'm inclined to ban it entirely. This is not a declaration that one side has "won"; it's a tentative test of allowing a posting topic that people seem to want to talk about.
|
Leperflesh posted:there have been, and will continue to be, low-key uses of AI art and text that nobody would notice unless someone explicitly pointed it out. If someone is running a game in TGR and one of the PCs in that game generated their character portrait that is appearing on one token, that is not the level of problem that we think we can realistically deal with, if anyone even notices. So, to be clear, if the post is "high effort" (lets assume for the sake of the argument that some hypothetical post is high effort), and happens to use AI in the process somewhere; the post is fine as long as it doesn't mention AI was used? Lets also assume that it's probable that the use of AI is undetectable with a passing glance. Leperflesh posted:Like guys I know we are all game nerds and so we want to read some rules and then immediately, reflexively theorycraft them to death. But can we not? If you have a specific post you want to make, and you don't know if it's OK, ask me or Anti. If you see a post you think isn't OK, report it. If we run with these rules for a bit and everyone is confused and chaos reigns, we'll figure it out. I mean, with respect, I'm honestly a little unsure of what the rules are actually saying so I feel like its fair to ask clarification, especially if you and Anti have kinda given me two different answers. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 00:43 on Jun 13, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 00:39
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Like this is more theorycrafting. If it's genuinely undetectable, nobody would report it, right? If a mod can't even tell, how could that mod act on it? I'm sure you'd be honest if I asked you, but a rule that hinges on honest confessions wouldn't work too well. Are you trying to get me to help you figure out how to sneak AI content into posts, so you can prove to everyone that it's good, actually? Please don't do that either. Leperflesh posted:It is a topical thread for AI chat and images and posts, and a recognition that AI chat anywhere else is likely to cause a derail or fight, plus an understanding that there might be gray areas we won't be able to fairly adjudicate and you can and should just not try too god drat hard to discern whether someone touched up their character portrait using photoshop's infill tool or whatever, because that's really unnecessarily looking for fights to pick. Okay so, to be clear then, as I feel like it's still a bit unclear, if someone posts what you consider is arguably a high effort content post that you or another mod happens to think might incidentally include AI; they won't press buttons as long as they don't mention they used AI? I know you don't want theory crafting but the purposes of rules I feel on a philosophical level is to clearly telegraph what's allowed if they are to be fair rules that are evenly applied. My description here also still firmly places the final judgement call with the mods and isn't something that can be game'd/rules lawyered, the point is to know what the envelop looks like, because it seems like by your latest post the intent isn't total "containment" of AI content, but only of chat? With containment of AI content limited to where its engineered to start a fight?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 01:24
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I appreciate where you're coming from raenir but there is no difference between "what if someone breaks a rule but nobody notices" and "this rule says I can do this if nobody notices" I mean no? That's not my intent at all; my intent is to clarify the rules because right now you are posting contradictory things and they also are in conflict with what Antivehicular has written in response to me? quote:This is the intent of the rule, yes. It's specifically based on the example posted in the previous thread of mostly handmade Blood Bowl assets that included a generated team logo, but where there's still been a lot of work put in by the poster manually. What we don't want people to post is just straight dumps of "I had ChatGPT make a dungeon" or "here's my new PC portrait from Midjourney" or whatever when there's no human creative work done. Taking a plain read as written interpretation of these rules, which is what I was originally asking about : quote:Do not make low-effort dumps of your AI-generated stuff in other TG threads. That includes but is not limited to: character portraits, maps, character sheets, adventure ideas, your one-on-one chatlogs with an AI, and more. Too many posters hate this stuff and so it invites a hostile reaction, extended irresolvable debates about the ethics, and lots of reports for mods to deal with. I asked, "does this mean it is allowed to post AI content as long as it isn't low effort?" and Antivehicular's originally response affirmed my interpretation but then I think you posted some things that confused me hence why the effort at clarification. If you agree with Antivehicular's post, and still agree with what you originally wrote below: Leperflesh posted:We're going to have to see how that falls out, really. It's basically impossible to police an absolute ban, and we definitely do not need volunteer forum monitors sweeping through every thread (especially game threads in TGR) looking for any sign of the illegal AI. Which strongly implies what I interpreted of the rules, than I have no questions and I'm satisfied to move on. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Jun 13, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 01:50
|
|
|
Like I understand what you want to encourage people to do, and I understand your concerns about people asking questions in order to know how to skirt close to line; which is why I'm sure Antivehicular was clear to assure that things will be closely scrutinized and not to take things as "licence" to pick fights or needlessly aggravate posting enemies. Personally I don't use AI, and don't intend to, so you generally don't need to worry about me trying to skirt the rules by 'just asking questions'. If you check the old AI thread I don't think that I can recall posted any AI content. Leperflesh posted:I'll double check with Anti to make sure we agree, but I think we meant low-effort to be descriptive of past posts that got reported, rather than a limiting modifier allowing some other level of AI-full effortful posts. Right, this is why it prompted a lot of questions because of this discrepancy. The kinds of posts you're generally referring to is someone dumping a whole bunch AI content in a thread and going "Look at this!" hence my questions about a "effortful post that happens to contain an incidental amount of AI" as you agree that looking at what I mean properly these aren't remotely similar to each other right? I get the feeling you're interpreted me as talking about a post that is effortful and has a "lot" of AI which isn't what I'm talking about.  e to add: There's definitely AI content that isn't low-effort or low-content; which is perhaps part of the cause of the misread or misinterpretation happening here. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Jun 13, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 02:23
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:I think the disagreement is fundamentally about whether this is true or not. That's the meta disagreement, but not one being resolved in TG or even specifically in the rules because: Leperflesh posted:We can probably just drop the words "low-effort" and that's probably OK but again I'll check and also I am probably off-duty for at least the next 14 hours so everyone hold your breath Thanks! And I really hate to do this, but that doesn't really help with clarity because then the rules still imply then the problem is the spamming of AI content. quote:Do not make So maybe rather than being caught up on the definition of low effort, the rule should read more like: "We ban the spamming/dumping of AI content outside the AI thread, and heavily discourage AI content that's low-effort, not-transformative or creative. No, AI isn't entirely banned outside of the AI thread; but we will crack down on any AI content that is spammy, low-effort, ai-chat, boasting, and so on, so while we prefer you keep AI content to the AI chat thread to avoid starting fights or derails; with that said, please keep any AI content to your posts outside of the AI thread to a minimum and make sure they are as transformative and as creative as you possibly can in recognition that a lot of people outside of the AI thread will dislike it." I feel like that's a lot clearer if that is closer to the intention without "guiding" people to be "skirting" the rules; because it carries the implicit warning of posting at your own risk so they better be at their best and non-confrontational behaviour. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Jun 13, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 02:41
|
|
|
Antivehicular posted:Okay, now that I'm not at work and have a little bit of brain: what I was trying to describe by acceptable "high-effort" is stuff that is clearly mostly human creative effort with small AI elements, like the example posted in the previous thread of mostly human-made Blood Bowl maps that contained an AI-generated team logo. This is more or less "if you're trying in good faith and not being obnoxious, we're not going to check if every pixel was artisanally rendered." If the content is all or primarily AI-generated, it shouldn't leave the AI thread even if it's high-effort or high-quality. Thank you this is what I wanted to confirm.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 13:56
|
|
|
I also wish to restate for the record that I too have no intention of trying to test those boundaries, and I am extremely unlikely to post any ai content to SA to begin with. I've basically never posted my regular commissions art because it's vtubers reimagined as dnd characters and I don't know if that's okay in TG.  StratGoatCom posted:Someone might commission an artist from that, there is zero chance of someone commissioning an artist from an AI output. This isn't true. It's basically the sole use case I've considered for my projects.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 15:45
|
|
|
Perhaps no single artist speaks for all artists, as there are "real" artists on both sides of the debate, and we can't come to a resolution just on who happens to yell the loudest as there is an unresolvable contention between members of the affected group.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 16:17
|
|
|
I always thought that on SA joke posts get some leeway, maybe in this case the joke wasn't obvious? That is something that I think I saw brought up above, there are some ttrpgs, and presumably some threads, where talking about ai makes sense outside of the ai chat thread. Perhaps these threads could be marked so it's clear to moderators that some light discussion as it directly relates to the game and subject matter is fine as it isn't really like ai chat and isnt likely to start a derail.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 16:22
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:Raenir Salazar is already posting here I got confused by the initials and now I'm stuck in a portable hole. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:ah christ Heya, hopefully your plumbing experience is better than mine. They spread dust and broken bits of drywall all over my kitchen.  If it helps I actually believe the "low effort" question was thoroughly settled by Antivehicular here: Antivehicular posted:Okay, now that I'm not at work and have a little bit of brain: what I was trying to describe by acceptable "high-effort" is stuff that is clearly mostly human creative effort with small AI elements, like the example posted in the previous thread of mostly human-made Blood Bowl maps that contained an AI-generated team logo. This is more or less "if you're trying in good faith and not being obnoxious, we're not going to check if every pixel was artisanally rendered." If the content is all or primarily AI-generated, it shouldn't leave the AI thread even if it's high-effort or high-quality. Or at least is thoroughly answers my questions from before earlier in the thread. The actual remaining question is more "Are jokes or non-controversial AI discussion allowed in threads where they would be appropriate"? See Nessus's post here: Nessus posted:I hope that there will not be a policy of slapping probations on on topic conversations over news or inspirational materials touching on LLMs etc. a recent example of what I mean is in the World of Darkness thread, but this could easily impact things like the threads on Shadowrun or Cyberpunk. And also are Joke posts allowed: Lurks With Wolves posted:Alright. I'm here to talk about the implied "no low-effort AI chat outside the AI thread" rule. Specially, how it interacts with this recent probation, which I'm going to repost in its entirety below.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
I was specifically suggesting people on the pro-AI side *not* to assume or call anyone Luddites!  E to add: also I think it's a little reductive to say I am pro AI, I personally merely feel I am taking a nuanced utilitarian position. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Jun 13, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
It'd be nice if "cool off" sixers didn't stay on the rap sheet. I think the important thing that if it's a cool off sixers it should be clear, "take a break" or similar doesn't imply that you did something wrong on its own, but that it just happened to be the straw that broke the camels back. While if it's unclear then I have no idea what I'm supposed to do with this information, did I do something wrong? Was there a better combination of words that wouldn't have been wrong? Was the buttons pushed because of some other reason? Some sixers I've gotten were like this and factor into me deciding not to post in a particular thread because that's basically the message I got, and if I remember correctly PMing the mod for clarification didn't clarify things. Ultimately I stopped going there because it was toxic af but the random sixers were the straw that broke the humpy Cr 1/8 creatures back. So that'd be the tldr, sixers that feel like the weather suck, be clear, maybe try to de-escalate first "hey people cool down a little please" if it doesn't seem urgent though but ultimately distinguish between a "don't do this specifically thing" and a "take a break" so the intent is clearly communicated.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2023 16:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
sebmojo posted:Fwiw this is exactly the opposite message from the recent course of the thread, which has been saying don't de escalate, jump straight to probations lol Personally my thinking is not to disagree with the idea that there could be more sixers, especially if people are being aggro in a way that requires immediate action, but I think also that in general that this doesn't mean to exclusively shift to sixers vs engaging to de-escalate. To simplify I guess I'm saying I agree we could use more sixers (not that I've been hanging out in TG long enough to really know this for a fact based off of experience) but also that they shouldn't be the automatic response to an issue. I.e "Use hammers more often but not every problem is a nail." Leperflesh posted:I try to be clear with the difference between a "don't post this specific thing" sixer and a "chill with this dumb slapfight" sixer. I am in favor of clear probation reasons. Yeah to be clear I'm not saying this is an issue with you as a mod or any other mod or IK in TG, I'm just stating my opinion in general what I think would be a good thing not that it is in response to something specific I've seen in TG. Leperflesh posted:Everyone please welcome Dwarf74 to full mod-hood! He's been operating as an IK across several threads for a long time now and doing a great job. Having a third mod on hand for TG should help us with coverage, vacations, etc. too. Pour one out for Dwarves00 to 73 who had to be sacrificed to reach peak Dwarf. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2023 23:04
|
|