AI Spam Report Reference Thread

[FinneysTrueVision]

User: Donneski

Another one of these essay style posts that very clearly look AI generated, but spammers keep creating them, attempting to receive merits.

INTRODUCTION
Whenever the topic of Bitcoin security is being discussed, one phrase that mostly follows immediately is “Just move it to cold storage.” Over time, this advice has become the standard recommendation for protecting funds especially for long-term holders who want to eliminate the risks associated with internet-connected wallets.
The truth is cold storage does solve a very important problem. By keeping private keys offline, it removes many of the attack vectors that affect hot wallets, exchanges and devices connected to the internet. This is why hardware wallets and air-gapped setups are widely trusted within the Bitcoin community.
However, the more I read security discussions and case studies, the more I began to notice something interesting which is cold storage often shifts the risk rather than eliminating it entirely. Once the keys are offline, the biggest vulnerability is no longer the internet, it becomes how humans manage those keys.
Security guides published by companies like Ledger and Trezor repeatedly emphasize that most incidents involving hardware wallets are not caused by the device being “hacked” but by mistakes made during setup, backup or transaction approval.
In other words, cold storage is a powerful tool but it is not the final layer of security.

WHY COLD STORAGE ALONE IS NOT COMPLETE SECURITY
Cold storage removes many technical threats but it also concentrates responsibility on the user. Once private keys are taken offline, security becomes less about software vulnerabilities and more about discipline, planning and long-term custody practices.
Some of the areas where this becomes visible include:

• Human Error Becomes The Primary Weakness
• Cold Storage Shifts Risk Rather Than Eliminating It
• Security Complacency Can Become Dangerous
• Custody Requires Process Not Just Devices

1. Human Error Becomes The Priamry Weakness
Several reports have shown that a surprising number of Bitcoin losses are not caused by sophisticated attacks but by simple operational mistakes. One of these reports is captured in this $1B Lost Yearly From Wrong Network Clicks
Examples of these human errors include:

• Storing seed phrases digitally where malware can access them
• Accidentally exposing recovery words through photos or cloud storage
• Signing transactions without fully understanding what is being approved

Security warnings from Trezor and Ledger often stress that seed phrases should never be stored digitally or typed into a computer unless absolutely necessary during secure recovery procedures.
Also, there have been several real world incidents involving phishing attacks targeting hardware wallet users. In some cases, attackers sent fake security alerts or emails that directed users to websites designed to look like official support pages from Ledger. Users who entered their recovery phrases on those sites unknowingly gave attackers full control of their funds. In situations like these, the hardware wallet itself was never compromised, the seed phrase was voluntarily exposed.
Cases like these highlight an important reality which is hardware wallets protect keys from devices but they cannot protect users from human mistakes or social engineering.

2. Cold Storage Shifts Risk Rather Than Eliminating It
One thing that often gets overlooked in security discussions is that every solution changes the threat model rather than removing risk entirely. Cold storage successfully removes many online attack vectors such as malware, phishing sites or compromised exchanges but once those threats disappear, a different responsibility emerges which is protecting and managing the seed phrase itself.
Guides from Bitcoin.org consistently remind users that whoever controls the private keys controls the bitcoin. When those keys are moved offline, the entire responsibility shifts to the owner. So the main challenge is no longer preventing hackers from accessing a wallet remotely, instead, it becomes ensuring that the keys are never lost, exposed or mishandled over time.
Cold storage protects against external threats but it also concentrates trust in a single point the person managing the keys.

3. Security Complacency Can Become Dangerous
Another subtle risk introduced by cold storage is psychological rather than technical. Once coins are placed in a hardware wallet or an offline setup, many people feel that the security problem has been permanently solved. This sense of finality often create complacency. In reality, Bitcoin custody requires continuous awareness. Backup locations may change, storage materials may degrade and personal circumstances may evolve over time.
Research conducted by Chainalysis have shown that operational mistakes and poor security habits remain a major contributor to cryptocurrency losses.

I trimmed a few paragraphs to keep this report from being too lengthy. Full post: https://bitlist.co/post/66489308

originality.ai - 99% confident that’s AI
gptzero.me - 100% AI
copyleaks.com - 100% AI

You raised some very important points especially about keeping backups offline and separating the seed phrase from the passphrase. I also really like the idea of storing them in different locations as that helps reduce the risk of losing access entirely.

The truth is, once the keys are offline, the cold wallet device has already handled most of the security work. At that point, the focus naturally shifts toward protecting the backups from exposure, loss or social engineering attempts. That was largely the thinking behind this topic. Cold storage removes many online threats but the long-term safety of the wallet still depends heavily on how the seed is stored and on maintaining general awareness of scams.

originality.ai - 99% confident that’s AI
gptzero.me - 100% AI

My perspective of Bitcoin is that it is both technology and a social shift happening at the same time.
On the surface it looks like digital money but underneath it’s really a system built on rules instead of trust. Traditionally, financial systems require us to trust banks, governments or intermediaries. Bitcoin came and replaced that requirement with open code and cryptography.

What makes it even more interesting is that people from completely different parts of the world can participate in the same monetary network without needing approval from anyone. That idea alone changes how we think about ownership and value transfer.

So for me, Bitcoin is not just a currency, it’s a new financial architecture that is still unfolding.

originality.ai - 82% confident that’s AI
gowinston.ai - Winston has detected the text as 3% human. It is highly probable that an AI text generation tool was used.
gptzero.me - 100% We are highly confident this text was AI generated.

[LoyceV]

What's the verdict on Newbie ALMN, who writes "fourm" instead of "forum" to make it look human?

I understand the suspicion, but I'm a real person using a translation tool to help me communicate better. My question is genuine. your insight for my post is appreciated.

Can you show me which translation tool writes "fourm" instead of "forum"?

Investing in a person with the expectation of a guaranteed outcome, like a future marriage, is inherently uncertain, much like gambling, because people have their own free will and choices. Treating relationships as transactions can lead to disappointment and emotional harm, whereas genuine connections thrive on mutual respect, care, and shared growth. Ultimately, valuing experiences and emotional bonds over returns on investment is healthier than comparing human relationships to gambling odds.

DeChecker — 100% AI
ZeroGPT— 100% AI
HumanizeAI — 100% AI

Good catch

No neutral tag for this Legendary chatbot spammer? I just left mine.

[Free Market Capitalist]

User: Donneski

I am going to ask the same LoyceV has asked about another guy before. No neutral tag for him? I am going to leave mine.

The nick was familiar and I've just realized that I've given him merits so I've just put him on ignore.

[HustleZ]

https://app.gptzero.me/ 100%
https://www.humanizeai.pro/detector 99%
https://copyleaks.com/ai-content-detector 100%
https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector 100%

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector 49.7%
https://app.gptzero.me/ 66%
https://stealthwriter.ai/ 47%

You're appreciated busting the Ai spammers but You overlook a main rule of a report and that is reporting atleast 3 posts all having 70%+ rating from The Ai Detectors given in the OP. Another thing I want to say is that the links you provide are of no use and it doesn't show the result like you want. Your intent is good but it doesn't work. It just leads to a new page for the text to be provided and not the result. What I would suggest is if you want to show the result then take a screenshot from that and paste the viewer link from Talkimg.com here. Then we would be able to see the results here.

At least 2 of the 7 AI content detectors mentioned below must give a result of the post having a strong likelihood of containing AI-written material (with "strong likelihood" defined for each one):

1. GPTZero - 70% probability to contain AI generated text or higher
2. Copyleaks AI Content Detector - 70% probability for AI or higher
3. Sapling AI Detector - 70%Fake or higher
4. Quillbot - 70% of text is likely to come from AI or higher
5. Zerogpt - 70%likely to include parts generated by AI/GPT or higher
6. StealthWriter - 70% AI probability or higher
7. Originality.ai - 70% confident that text is AI generated or higher

• There must be at least 3 posts by the account that meet the requirements specified in A. If its just a one-off or even two-off, the poster may deserve some leniency, but if they make a habit of it, their posts should be reported as "AI spam."

.

[lovesmayfamilis]

You're appreciated busting the Ai spammers but You overlook a main rule of a report and that is reporting atleast 3 posts all having 70%+ rating from The Ai Detectors given in the OP. Another thing I want to say is that the links you provide are of no use and it doesn't show the result like you want. Your intent is good but it doesn't work. It just leads to a new page for the text to be provided and not the result. What I would suggest is if you want to show the result then take a screenshot from that and paste the viewer link from Talkimg.com here. Then we would be able to see the results here.

Truth?? Is that what you need to do ? And who of the other users makes screenshots?
I agree that user accusations are not enough, if the detector ratings are low, then this is not enough, moderators delete only with a probability of more than 75%


But as for the legend's account @cryptoaddictchie, which has deleted more than 20 AI posts, didn't he know about the rules? Or do we still see the work of some translators who embed AI texts in the translation?
If I'm not mistaken, has there already been a story with another Filipino account?

[HustleZ]

Truth?? Is that what you need to do ? And who of the other users makes screenshots?
I agree that user accusations are not enough, if the detector ratings are low, then this is not enough, moderators delete only with a probability of more than 75%
But as for the legend's account @cryptoaddictchie, which has deleted more than 20 AI posts, didn't he know about the rules? Or do we still see the work of some translators who embed AI texts in the translation?
If I'm not mistaken, has there already been a story with another Filipino account?

Bro, I don't know what the fu*k are you talking about. The User BlackBoss_ is trying to show the results of the Ai detectors to us by giving us links which clearly does not work. I suggested him to use screenshots *IF he wanted to. That's the only way we can see the results because the links do not work. This is not mandatory and not written anywhere to give links or screenshots but I just gave him a suggestion if he wanted to. And what do My post have to Do with The legendary member?? Or the Filipino Account??

[lovesmayfamilis]

Truth?? Is that what you need to do ? And who of the other users makes screenshots?
I agree that user accusations are not enough, if the detector ratings are low, then this is not enough, moderators delete only with a probability of more than 75%
But as for the legend's account @cryptoaddictchie, which has deleted more than 20 AI posts, didn't he know about the rules? Or do we still see the work of some translators who embed AI texts in the translation?
If I'm not mistaken, has there already been a story with another Filipino account?

Bro,

.....Here is my post.

Nigeria is one ......

quillbot 100%
Copyleaks AI Content Detected
gptzero  100%

Where do you see the link that leads to the display of the detector result?

And I'm not your brother! In my family, everyone is a sister.

I didn't ask you about the legend's account.

edit:

Where are the links or screenshots here?

I would like to add a reference regarding user Blour as he is using Ai to write his posts and even got Merited on It.

User:  Blour

[HustleZ]

.....Here is my post.

[--]

quillbot 100%
Copyleaks AI Content Detected
gptzero  100%

Where do you see the link that leads to the display of the detector result?

I didn't suggest you to use Screenshots  

And I see the links here:-

https://app.gptzero.me/ 100%
https://www.humanizeai.pro/detector 99%
https://copyleaks.com/ai-content-detector 100%
https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector 100%

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector 49.7%
https://app.gptzero.me/ 66%
https://stealthwriter.ai/ 47%

Where are the links or screenshots here?

I would like to add a reference regarding user Blour as he is using Ai to write his posts and even got Merited on It.

User:  Blour

Where did I say I used screenshots or links      

And I'm not your brother! In my family, everyone is a sister.

Oh!

Then I must not argue with you further.

Ps: I suggested him to use screenshots because once I tried to share the links to show Ai detectors score because of Some cocky members here but when I saw It didn't work then I didn't use it and I didn't have time to add Screenshots cause of my laziness. So I knew the reason he added the links. Perhaps he could tell himself why he added the links. I can be wrong

[TokenTikas]

There must be at least 3 posts by the account that meet the requirements specified in A. If its just a one-off or even two-off, the poster may deserve some leniency, but if they make a habit of it, their posts should be reported as "AI spam."

You're appreciated busting the Ai spammers but You overlook a main rule of a report and that is reporting atleast 3 posts all having 70%+ rating from The Ai Detectors given in the OP.

Recently, I have noticed that many people are reporting just one post and sharing it here. However, to properly identify whether a user is actually posting AI-generated content, there should be at least three posts from that user. With only one post, it is difficult to clearly determine if the person is really using AI or not.

Your intent is good but it doesn't work. It just leads to a new page for the text to be provided and not the result.

You also mentioned that the reports shared by BlackBoss_ are not giving accurate results but from what I can see that, the results look fairly reasonable. Apart from the links we previously mentioned for checking whether content is AI-generated, these ones can also be used without any issue. You explained things to him nicely through your suggestions, but there is one important point we should always keep in mind. Whenever someone submits a report about AI detection, we should take time to review and verify/check it properly to see whether the report is actually valid or not.
Few days ago looked at the important examples in the AI guidelines post created by theymos, based on that I feel it is better to make a decision carefully. Because of that, even if I detect AI in one or two posts, I usually do not report them immediately. I just keep an eye on the user to see how their next posts look before taking any action. But while observing them, many of you/other end up reporting those posts here already. Still, those who report AI-detected posts are doing a good job.

* I acknowledge that not nearly enough people are banned for low-quality posts. The fundamental issue is that we don't want to ban someone just for posting one or two stupid posts, since that's subjective and might just be due to the person having weird opinions or being a poor writer. So to evaluate a user properly, we really want to be reading a sampling of 20-40 of their posts. But doing this sort of evaluation (i.e. reading through hundreds of mediocre-to-bad posts) is really soul-sucking, so nobody wants to do it very much. I'm still thinking about ways to resolve this issue, possibly involving rejiggering how merit works.

[jokers10]

Because of that, even if I detect AI in one or two posts, I usually do not report them immediately.

If it is a huge AI written post and is the only post of a user and it is obviously written by AI I just report it directly without posting a proof in this topic, and the posts like that are always being deleted. If the post is not long enough, then right, sometimes it is better to wait for new examples.

[ALMN]

What's the verdict on Newbie ALMN, who writes "fourm" instead of "forum" to make it look human?

I understand the suspicion, but I'm a real person using a translation tool to help me communicate better. My question is genuine. your insight for my post is appreciated.

Can you show me which translation tool writes "fourm" instead of "forum"?

Gemini, I think the reason for writing this way because my orginal texet that translate from I wrote it fourm "فورم"

I understand the suspicion, but I'm a real person using a translation tool to help me communicate better. My question is genuine. your insight for my post is appreciated.

You could just use AI to answer your questions for you, since you're already there at the terminal... You're located in Philadelphia and trying to do face-to-face BTC trades but you need a translation tool to write on the internet?

Hi,
Your question is valid and logical, but the answer is somewhat complex. In the world of AI there is a field called prompt engineering, which involves inputting prompts in specific formats to jailbreak the model either to bypass restrictions or to extract data.
When you act as an ethical security researcher trying to test the model's resilience and identify bypass attempts, the model's safety mechanisms begin to categorize your account based on its risk level. This can escalate until you are placed in an isolated container (sandbox) away from the main system.
At this point, even the simplest questions are literally blocked. For example, if you ask, what is the temperature today? the response might be, I'm sorry, I cannot help with that, or you may receive a very dry, generic answer. Additionally, the model may begin to maneuver to avoid giving you information that is neither fully factual nor explicitly false.
To ensure you don’t simply open a new account and start over, the model learns your behavioral patterns: your writing style, typing speed, mouse movements, device fingerprint, IP address, and more. This allows the system to recognize you and isolate you again, even if you try using a new account or a different device. At this point you really use AI to answer your questions.

[ESG]

Hi,
Your question is valid and logical, but the answer is somewhat complex. In the world of AI there is a field called prompt engineering, which involves inputting prompts in specific formats to jailbreak the model either to bypass restrictions or to extract data.
When you act as an ethical security researcher trying to test the model's resilience and identify bypass attempts, the model's safety mechanisms begin to categorize your account based on its risk level. This can escalate until you are placed in an isolated container (sandbox) away from the main system.
At this point, even the simplest questions are literally blocked. For example, if you ask, what is the temperature today? the response might be, I'm sorry, I cannot help with that, or you may receive a very dry, generic answer. Additionally, the model may begin to maneuver to avoid giving you information that is neither fully factual nor explicitly false.
To ensure you don’t simply open a new account and start over, the model learns your behavioral patterns: your writing style, typing speed, mouse movements, device fingerprint, IP address, and more. This allows the system to recognize you and isolate you again, even if you try using a new account or a different device. At this point you really use AI to answer your questions.

 Training AI for scientific purposes I see a great advance,
but training it to write, regardless of which language it is,
does not make you a person with more knowledge,
but makes AI more knowledgeable.

 Try training your brain, it can deliver better results, if you are still not willing
to improve your knowledge in a language that you are not able to read and understand,
so why write in this language with AI?

 But if you insist, try clicking the 'humanize' button,
maybe it will help you write more things that you don't know what you're writing.

#:
 -I particularly think that it is a great lack of respect
 to come in a topic where is talk about the problems of using AI to write,
coming here to use AI to defend yourself and or explain yourself.

What was your prompt entered?
would be: Mrs. AI, make a defense for my case.

[macson]

This newbie account has just become active again after being offline for a long time and then bursting with AI posts. All three of the posts below were detected as AI, and even most of his posts from 2025 were also detected as AI. He should have been tagged for that.

User: Jwest

1. Network stability angle
I think the key reason Bitcoin Core should stay main isn’t just security, it’s network cohesion. With most nodes and miners running Core, upgrades are smoother and accidental forks are far less likely. That kind of stability is priceless for a network of this scale.
2. Developer review & reliability angle
Core isn’t just popular, it’s peer-reviewed and battle-tested. Newer clients might innovate faster, but Core’s reliability over more than a decade is why so many people trust it with billions in value. That trust alone is a huge advantage.
3.  Historical perspective angle
Remember, Bitcoin Core is the original client that survived early forks, attacks, and debates. That history isn’t just nostalgia, it’s proof that Core can handle crises while keeping the network safe. Alternatives are interesting, but history favors Core.

GPTZero.me: 100%
Originality.ai: 100%
Copyleaks: 100%

When an exchange freezes a wallet, it basically locks the funds. You can’t send, withdraw, or trade the crypto until the exchange decides to unfreeze it. This can happen for different reasons,like suspicious activity, regulatory requirements, or a legal order. Your coins aren’t gone, but you lose access to them temporarily, so it’s a reminder that keeping crypto on exchanges comes with some risk.


But if an exchange never unfreezes your wallet, unfortunately, you basically lose access to your funds. The coins are still there technically, but you can’t move or use them. That’s why many people recommend not keeping large amounts of crypto on exchanges long-term, using cold storage or a hardware wallet gives you full control.

My opinion

GPTZero.me: 100%
Originality.ai: Not Detected
Copyleaks: 100%

It’s really interesting to think about how a country’s budget would change if more people hold Bitcoin instead of traditional bank deposits. Most governments rely heavily on the traditional financial system: banks use our deposits to give loans, and the government collects taxes on interest, income, and spending. The central bank also uses this flow of money to manage inflation and economic growth.

But if citizens move a large chunk of their savings into Bitcoin:

Bank deposits shrink, so banks have less to lend. That slows business growth and borrowing.

Government revenue drops, because there’s less taxable activity.

Monetary policy loses some of its power, since central banks can’t control Bitcoin.

Money becomes harder to track and manage, especially across borders.

In such a scenario, fiscal policy would have to adapt. Governments might need new ways to tax crypto, focus more on efficient spending, or even explore their own digital currencies to maintain some control. Essentially, Bitcoin challenges the traditional flow of money, making budgets less predictable and forcing policymakers to rethink how economies are managed.

It’s fascinating to imagine a world where Bitcoin isn’t just an investment, but a real influence on national budgets and policy.

GPTZero.me: 100%
Originality.ai: 100%
Copyleaks: 100%

[Ultegra134]

Training AI for scientific purposes I see a great advance,
but training it to write, regardless of which language it is,
does not make you a person with more knowledge,
but makes AI more knowledgeable.

 Try training your brain, it can deliver better results, if you are still not willing
to improve your knowledge in a language that you are not able to read and understand,
so why write in this language with AI?

 But if you insist, try clicking the 'humanize' button,
maybe it will help you write more things that you don't know what you're writing.

#:
 -I particularly think that it is a great lack of respect
 to come in a topic where is talk about the problems of using AI to write,
coming here to use AI to defend yourself and or explain yourself.

What was your prompt entered?
would be: Mrs. AI, make a defense for my case.

Imagine his audacity of being accused for AI usage and writes a post to defend himself, using AI again. He either considers each one of us idiots, or is simply trolling to mess around the forum. We don't want your AI testing here, go look for somewhere else to "train" your AI and to practice your prompt engineering. This is a forum that humans discuss, no one wants your trained bot replies.

[BlackBoss_]

Another thing I want to say is that the links you provide are of no use

No use?
Are these links actually dead?

I attached links for people to more easily visit these AI checking sites and verify % of AI generated contents I shared in my post. Don't trust me, and figures I wrote, verify with these links. Rather than going to OP for links to AI checkers, I provided links in my posts, that saves time for anyone who want to verify my figures in my post.

it doesn't show the result like you want.

Yes, it does not show results directly but you must copy and paste the reported post and see the result by yourself, also verify figures in my post.

Your intent is good but it doesn't work. It just leads to a new page for the text to be provided and not the result. What I would suggest is if you want to show the result then take a screenshot from that and paste the viewer link from Talkimg.com here. Then we would be able to see the results here.

Why did you complain about me and my report only?
Many reports did not have screenshots, for example
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.msg66492868#msg66492868
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.msg66456841#msg66456841

Do you think moderators will not check posts by themselves, just look at my screenshots which can be faked and delete posts or ban users?

Recently, I have noticed that many people are reporting just one post and sharing it here. However, to properly identify whether a user is actually posting AI-generated content, there should be at least three posts from that user. With only one post, it is difficult to clearly determine if the person is really using AI or not.

I saw one post, checked it, and reported it, what's wrong?
If you or anyone want to do more investigation on that user, let's go doing this.

[lovesmayfamilis]

I saw one post, checked it, and reported it, what's wrong?
If you or anyone want to do more investigation on that user, let's go doing this.

Everything is simple here. You report a post written by AI in order to clear the forum of AI, and the one who attacked you is specifically looking for three posts, as nutildah wrote, in order to get merit. Everyone has different goals; you have to understand that having several alternative accounts, like your opponent's, is quite a difficult task, and he has to try only for himself .

And yes, it is possible to report one post or even several directly to the moderators, but when someone has a desire to post one post, there is no crime in this, but it only indicates that the person has no intentions of receiving merits.

[TokenTikas]

I saw one post, checked it, and reported it, what's wrong?

I’m not blaming you about the reporting matter because you saw a post like that through AI detection and reported it, which is something normal. But regarding posting about this kind of AI detection, it is usually stated that there should be at least three such posts available or observed and that is why i mentioned it.

[ESG]

.....
...but it only indicates that the person has no intentions of receiving merits.

..so, another thing that also came to mind reading here,
that it would be a good deal to create extra accounts, make several posts with AI,
and then come here to report them in the hope of merits....

 It took me a while to understand that the problem of merits is the person creating
several accounts, ranking them, and participating in campaigns in
which they receive for creating a certain amount of posts here on the forum,
and then fulfilling the requirements to receive, so the business is
to create several accounts to take advantage of these subscriptions
as much as possible.
 Result, several accounts posting clueless things and or using AI to go to
the technical discussion areas and in various areas of the forum,
just to win and earn as much as possible with several accounts....

Result: normal person reading these incoherent posts and discomfort in the belly.

[SatoPrincess]

.....
...but it only indicates that the person has no intentions of receiving merits.

..so, another thing that also came to mind reading here,
that it would be a good deal to create extra accounts, make several posts with AI,
and then come here to report them in the hope of merits....

I wouldn’t put it past account farmers. I can’t remember exactly the account but I think there was one account who was caught with multiple accounts. He would use the newbie account to ask a question, and then be the first to reply with his main account…got a lot of merits that way until they got caught.

[nutildah]

Newbie posting useless AI spam... they alter a few characters in each post to avoid detectors but failed.

WilliamDuck03

#1 - edits in bold

This shows how the space is constantly balancing hype with actual conviction. Early excitement can pull attention fast, but long-term relevance usually depends on whether people still care once the initial buzz fades. From what I’ve seen across different launches, the projects that keep building quietly during slower phases tend to earn stronger community trust over time. Curious how others here see this playing out long term.

Copyleaks: 100% AI text
Sapling: 100% Fake

#2

Fork projects like this always end up getting dissected heavily on Bitcointalk, especially when questions around premine history, miner distribution, or thread continuity start resurfacing. Watching members revisit those early decisions is actually useful because it reshapes how newer participants understand the project today. Summarizing those clarified points in a crypto press release later on can help prevent the narrative from drifting away from what the community has already hashed out here.

Copyleaks: 100% AI text
Sapling: 100% Fake

#3

Lowkey like how this thread is going deeper than just surface hype and actually looking at how the project plans to sustain relevance. A lot of launches get early traction off momentum alone, but once the spotlight rotates, only the ones with real ecosystem layering keep community attention locked in.

From what I’ve seen working around Web3 rollouts and narrative shaping, consistency in how teams communicate progress makes a bigger difference than most expect. When product moves, partnerships, and roadmap milestones stay visible, it keeps mindshare alive even during slower market phases.

Hype can pull initial liquidity, but sustained storytelling is what keeps holders from drifting once newer narratives start trending.

Curious how you all see this project holding engagement long term when the cycle cools and fresh competition starts flooding the space.

Copyleaks: 100% AI text
Sapling: 99.9% Fake

I saw one post, checked it, and reported it, what's wrong?
If you or anyone want to do more investigation on that user, let's go doing this.

Its fine if you want to do this, but for the purposes of tagging an account, its better to make sure the AI use wasn't just a one time thing. 3 posts (or more) establish a pattern that this might be something the user regularly does.

If they are newbie or throwaway accounts, sure you can write a post here and then make a report to the moderators.

The preferable standard for reporting a user here for the first time is 3 posts by 3 detectors. IMO, only 2 are needed if:

• its a newbie that has nothing but spam posts
• Copyleaks says a post is 70%+ AI (the most accurate detector)

But if we are accusing an established member of using AI then we want the full 3 posts and 3 detectors.