AI Sparks Explosive Division in Forum Community! 🤖

[Kazkaz27]

Bitcointalk’s AI Divide: Unleash Mini-Mods to Slay Spam Plague and Crush Censorship Tyranny! 🤖

So Our Community is Divided. Although the majority of users here utilize AI and consider it a friend, an almost equal number of members have deemed it an enemy of the forum, according to a recent community POLL. The technology itself is promising and not problematic. What is problematic is spam or low-quality posts, which users create and spread like a deadly plague all over the forum. AI is simply a tool these users choose to use in order to flood the platform.

What we can agree on is that low-quality content clogs up the forum. Spam is awful and should be removed.

AI itself is not inherently bad, and using it to create something is not inherently wrong either. What is wrong is using AI without disclosure.

It should become standard practice for users to highlight content generated or partly generated by AI in order to alleviate concerns from other users that it’s disingenuous, misleading, or soulless. This cuts back on AI-generated spam because users can’t pass AI-generated content off as their own. Just like a scammer does not come out and say, “Hey everyone, I am a scammer,” a spammer will likely not disclose that his posts are AI-generated or enhanced.

AI-enhanced posts should never be 100% AI. For qualified AI usage, it should have a human element and carry the message that the human component advocates. It should be reviewed, approved, and tagged as AI-enhanced by the user who publishes it. Furthermore, if some information in an AI-generated post is not complete or factual, a disclaimer highlighting that the information is in fact not 100% accurate or up to date should be implemented and the information should be viewed more as an outline versus pure factual data.

The point of this is to avoid forum censorship related to the legitimate utilization of AI content, and also to prevent being left in the Stone Age as AI takes over the world by storm.

The solution is not the eradication of AI-enhanced content or complete censorship of those who utilize it.

The solution is to target habitual “shit-posters.”

Introducing a community-based response which can lighten the workload for main moderators: Mini-Mods!

Mini-mods are basically self-explanatory, although there are a couple of distinct differences and roles they would play if introduced into the forum.

Mini-Mods in practice have limited power compared to standard moderators. Mini-Mods have a direct task to evaluate habitual spammers, which are received by them through community reports. Reports from the community regarding spam would essentially go to a queue. Mini-Mods would take users from that queue and evaluate the past 50 posts of a qualified participant. To become qualified for the mini-mods queue, a user has to have at least 5 posts reported as spam. This elevates one-off spam reports and prevents exponential growth of users in the queue. The special function mini-mods have is to cast a vote together to determine the fate of a qualified candidate in the queue. The vote options would be warning, temporary mute, temporary signature ban, temporary banishment, or permanent ban. The diverse nature of mini-mods would ensure that biases against members would be kept in check.

Here are a few Questions I challenge the community to answer & think members should consider:

Would you volunteer for this community-based solution to improve the community’s experience? If so, drop your username like this: “@Kazkaz27 Mini-Mod Volunteer.”

Does this type of approach help eliminate biases, or is there a better, more fair approach?

Does a strict ban on AI-related content censor how users choose to interact and contribute to the community?

Is AI-enhanced topics or posts really the issue at hand, or is it the users that use it in bad faith to create spam?

[Kazkaz27]

Reserved!

I’ll be the first to volunteer.

@Kazkaz27 Mini-Mod Volunteer  

[Vod]

"Mini-mod" sounds like a great name for our new AI overlords.  We don't need Theymos for this - just create an AI agent to report invalid posts. 

[crwth]

If by the definition of Mini-mod - "community-elected helpers with limited moderation powers", we don't need that.

We can use the "Report to moderator" button to report it. Easy as that.
^{We can serve as our own mini-mod with the report button}

This could introduce the possibility of abuse, etc. I'm curious as to why start this discussion? Are the moderators doing enough already? Based on the reports I do, it's handled pretty quickly.

[joker_josue]

This conversation again?

What you're describing is already the moderator's job. It's up to each user who finds spam to report it to the moderator.
There's no need to create a new moderator role.

But I've already noticed that you're highly committed to this issue of the good/bad use of AI.

A few days ago, guidelines on the use of AI were announced. So now we wait to see what the real impact will be. There's no need to start a new thread about it every 3 days...

[Kazkaz27]

If by the definition of Mini-mod - "community-elected helpers with limited moderation powers", we don't need that.

We can use the "Report to moderator" button to report it. Easy as that.
^{We can serve as our own mini-mod with the report button}

This could introduce the possibility of abuse, etc. I'm curious as to why start this discussion? Are the moderators doing enough already? Based on the reports I do, it's handled pretty quickly.

That’s a good button, but this would be slightly more advanced.

I acknowledge your concern regarding the possibility that Mini-Mods could introduce the possibility of abuse, etc. Can you give me an example: How could Mini-Mods introduce the possibility of abuse, etc.?

Respectfully, I believe I stated why I started this discussion directly in the main text. Certainly, if members read the questions I challenged members to answer or at the very least considered them, they themselves may see why I advocate for a community-based approach to reduce spammers while refraining from overlord AI censorship. I think moderators as well as the community would benefit from a community-driven activity that aims to provide support to the system. What type of qualifications, hypothetically speaking, should a Mini-Mod have given their very limited power?

Moderators do their jobs as they should, considering it’s a paid position and an honor to serve on the forum. To have Mini-Mod Volunteers would be like community service. Standards for volunteers should be set to address real concerns backed with logic and reasoning.

Paid Moderators could maintain the ability to veto decisions made by the Mini-Mods so long as the votes on a decision are close in the polls.

If you can help me discover or address any major cracks by playing devil’s advocate and giving me some legit examples vs. blanket statements, I’d be persuaded or try to tag you back with a considerable solution.

Reports have only two results in my experience: action or not. Your experience is not measurable, although I’m glad that’s your personal experience.

[Lida93]

Imo, I think there's no explosive division on this matter of AI usage since Theymos has address that in his post just days ago and the community accepts it. Allowing things to apply in the way the OP suggests might lead to more seemingly AI created posts in the forum than naturally written posts since it would be that all what a user needs to do is to declare it that this part or that most part of my work are AI made.
For the mini-mod volunteering, there's no difference between users who voluntarily constantly reports spams and shit posts to forum moderators upon catching sight at it. We need to move to other things but certainly not this AI matter over again.

[Kazkaz27]

Imo, I think there's no explosive division on this matter of AI usage since Theymos has address that in his post just days ago and the community accepts it. Allowing things to apply in the way the OP suggests might lead to more seemingly AI created posts in the forum than naturally written posts since it would be that all what a user needs to do is to declare it that this part or that most part of my work are AI made.
For the mini-mod volunteering, there's no difference between users who voluntarily constantly reports spams and shit posts to forum moderators upon catching sight at it. We need to move to other things but certainly not this AI matter over again.

Considering the ongoing POLL linked in the main text, which was created only a few hours before the statement Theymos made regarding AI, there is clearly division on the matter. It’s factual.

What exactly “might lead to more seemingly AI created posts in the forum than naturally written posts since it would be that all what a user needs to do is to declare it that this part or that most part of my work are AI made.”?— How? — What hypothetical example exists given Mini-Mods prerogative in play?

There is a considerable difference. Mini-Mods cast actual decisions whether to warn, temporarily prohibit signatures, mute, or ban. [They] aid towards reducing spam overload and overwhelmed moderators.

This conversation again?

What you're describing is already the moderator's job. It's up to each user who finds spam to report it to the moderator.
There's no need to create a new moderator role.

But I've already noticed that you're highly committed to this issue of the good/bad use of AI.

A few days ago, guidelines on the use of AI were announced. So now we wait to see what the real impact will be. There's no need to start a new thread about it every 3 days...

Sadly.

Yeah, It's gonna sound alot like a moderator job given the fact it is on a miniature level.

I think it's fair and it's proactive to address concerns. Doing so with ideas or possible solutions is advantageous in my opinion.

Yes, a few days ago lead to some current conversations.

[lovesmayfamilis]

I can't read your long posts, which look like some kind of nonsense to me.

Let's keep it simple. Tell me, how many times have you, the future mini-moderator, oh, yes, and also a volunteer, found AI spammers in this topic?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.1900

The second question is, what prevents you from doing your volunteering without the title of "mini-volunteer moderator"?

Or even so, let's ask our big moderators how many reports from you were considered good that you sent to check spam from AI?

If it comforts you, then I think the community will not mind if you are under your avatar, sign yourself a title that you write so well about. Go ahead.

[Free Market Capitalist]

...

Didn't read, lol.

Actually, I did read a bit but I had the same experience related by lovesmayfamilis.

This conversation again?
...
A few days ago, guidelines on the use of AI were announced. So now we wait to see what the real impact will be. There's no need to start a new thread about it every 3 days...

I don't see the need either.

I can't read your long posts, which look like some kind of nonsense to me.

To me too. If there was negative merit o downward voting of some kind I would have given it to him.

[Alpha Marine]

Personally, I don't understand why anybody should need AI to write anything here. I don't even know why it's even up for discussion. I mean, this is not a formal place where you need to write formally and speak eloquently before you can be rated. All that matters is the information you're trying pass. So I don't understand the excuse for using AI to generate text to post on the forum. If you can't write properly in English, you can simply use a writing tool like Grammarly to correct your grammar and spelling so it can be readable.  

If you must use AI, you can use it for research, read what it generates, and learn from it. Using it to generate text to post or even as part of your post is not necessary at all. You can even cite it, like when people cite from a website with a link and quote part of the website, but using it to generate your text is inexcusable in my opinion.

I don't understand why these discussions of what should be allowed and what should not be allowed are unnecessary in my opinion. The moment a post is generated by AI, whether the whole post or part of the post, it should not be allowed. The only allowed AI text are when it is used as reference and it is stated.
No point for mini mods or whatever and having discussion of what should be allowed and what should not. It's pointless.

[Nathrixxx]

So Our Community is Divided. Although the majority of users here utilize AI and consider it a friend

I doubt this, many are quite using AI but not in the conditions that makes it go against the forum rules again, before now, only few members like using AI to post, some will reference it an some don't bother doing so, which I scan attest to the fact that using AI to make a post could be termed plagiarism, because there's nothing bad in making reference to the source of your content.

Now going forward to other divisions where the use of AI is made applicable, such could be more relevant in other aspects than being limited to posting alone, which AI has been serving people with diverse benefits, but what is bad in given credit to these bot as source, I don't see any division it might have caused here, because r admin already point out the forum perspective to the use of AI henceforth, we are left with no choice than complete compliance.

[SatoPrincess]

This whole idea just comes across to me as members who want titles and praises for making reports. Just make your reports here. The mods have always acted swiftly on every AI report I have made so I don’t see the need for “mini mods”.

[Welsh]

overwhelmed moderators.

I'm certainly not overwhelmed. In fact, I probably could do with more reports coming my way. Finding posts to take action on is a little different as I'm only one pair of eyes, but I'd estimate over 80% of actions I take are from posts I find rather than them being reported. Certainly, over 50%.

Lets take a look at some of the past months:

Period Jan 04 - Feb 03. In this period, 1457 reports handled as good, 65 handled as bad, 145 unhandled.

Period Dec 05 - Jan 04. In this period, 1870 reports handled as good, 65 handled as bad, 106 unhandled

Period Nov 05 - Dec 05. In this period, 1268 reports handled as good, 77 handled as bad, 83 unhandled.

The vast majority of reports are handled every month/period. In those 3 periods, we have over 90% handled consistently. Unhandled below 10% consistently. Also, do remember that unhandled reports don't mean they haven't been seen or reviewed. Leaving reports unhandled is a perfectly valid option at times. I would estimate (without any evidence of course) that more than 80% of those unhandled reports were seen and reviewed by someone. It could also be based on the time theymos retrieved those stats, it might be that the time theymos retrieves those stats, is a particular hotspot for unhandled reports. Also, some might be in local sections which don't have a dedicated moderator, and therefore no or very little knowledge of the languages between the mods. So, we have to take all those things into consideration.

Personally, I don't think that looks like the mods being overwhelmed. I think we have a little more than 20 moderators including theymos. Lets just say 20 to be safe though. If we take the total of those three periods: 5136 reports and divide that by the amount of mods, thats a little more than 250~ reports across three periods for each moderator. That's a little more than 100 if we take the busiest period of those three for each moderator. That's like a couple reports per moderator each day right?

The height of ICOS and airdrops you might consider it a heavy workload, and a lot got missed then due to sheer amount, but that was when the forum was at its highest activity level. Well before the influx of AI issues, but I don't think the current moderators are overworked per say. Its more like, there's not enough eyes, this was supplemented by a highly active community reporting things, but that has declined over the years, which I would like to see some sort of positive encouragement towards getting more users to report like the report badges or something.


Just for transparency I've handled 2 reports in the last hour (which includes making this post also) and taken 13 actions myself. So, absolutely reports don't make up our entire workload, but that's the only statistics we have to base on when considering whether we are overworked or not.

[Cryptoprincess101]

There will be no such thing as mini mods volunteer; everyone are mods if you must know, the only difference is that assigned mods enjoys some privileges, and rewards are also given to them, but it is the duty if you and I to make the forum a better place by making reports to moderators so that they can take actions.

So Our Community is Divided. Although the majority of users here utilize AI and consider it a friend, an almost equal number of members have deemed it an enemy of the forum, according to a recent community POLL.

Who and what divided the community, AI or theymos which one?
As far as know, AI was already frowned upon even before the new AI guidelines by theymos. Who are the majority of users that considers AI as a friend, the 12 people that voted in your poll? and about 27 total voters are they the numbers of majority in the forum?

[DireWolfM14]

Imagine having to use AI to write a wall-of-text spam-post about how to stop AI spam.

And then, imagine being an AI spammer and thinking you have a chance at becoming a mod on this forum.  

[anonymousminer]

This whole idea just comes across to me as members who want titles and praises for making reports. Just make your reports here. The mods have always acted swiftly on every AI report I have made so I don’t see the need for “mini mods”.

This couldn't be more accurate!!  I have this OP on ignore but saw yet ANOTHER one of these threads so decided to see what other people are saying.  From what I have gathered over time, this user just wants to be relevant so bad it's killing him.  TBH, I just wish he'd quit f**king off here in META shitposting and correct his giant AI SLOP of misinformation on the collectibles board.  There are THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of errors just waiting for this user to correct.  It should have been created properly, then posted... not the other way around.  That would be the proper thing for all the "newbies" he claims to be protecting.  This OP uses AI for everything including the writing of this post I'd imagine.  Just another clown show of this user trying to be relevant.

[Kazkaz27]

To be honest, I create these types of discussions based on logic, facts and brainstorming new ideas to bring dialogue into the community. (I’m a glutton for punishment) I play the “bad guy,” the polarizing figure who tests boundaries and creates heated debates. The goal is always to contribute positively and get community input regarding solutions. I have haters because of it. (Props to my clickbait titles) I always get their attention, and they claim I want relevance, which they themselves give me. Despite the lies they attempt to spread about me, I keep going, business as usual. Everything they claim about me has been clearly defined and resolved in other threads yet they follow me around and bring it up in other unrelated topics to discredit me but really they just keep my posts at the top of the pages. For that I thank them.

~DireWolfM14
~anonymousminer

My biggest fans. Bless their souls 🙏

[DireWolfM14]

~DireWolfM14
~anonymousminer

Just keep digging up more of your alts to do that.

[howardsentell]

anonymous and wolf you cannot have a productive discussion without slander. You know the forum rules and ignored them. Lets put aside the topic of AI and focus on behavior which is more important. If this continues I will create a reputation post and give a red trust. This behavior destroys another members reputation. The forum supports BTC as a principle of free speech not abuse it. Do you want to escalate this further? Learn to agree to disagree if not move on. Proverbs 14:22 Isnt it obvious that conspirators lose out while the thoughtful win loyalty and trust.

overwhelmed moderators.

I'm certainly not overwhelmed. In fact, I probably could do with more reports coming my way. Finding posts to take action on is a little different as I'm only one pair of eyes, but I'd estimate over 80% of actions I take are from posts I find rather than them being reported. Certainly, over 50%.

Lets take a look at some of the past months:

Period Jan 04 - Feb 03. In this period, 1457 reports handled as good, 65 handled as bad, 145 unhandled.

Period Dec 05 - Jan 04. In this period, 1870 reports handled as good, 65 handled as bad, 106 unhandled

Period Nov 05 - Dec 05. In this period, 1268 reports handled as good, 77 handled as bad, 83 unhandled.

The vast majority of reports are handled every month/period. In those 3 periods, we have over 90% handled consistently. Unhandled below 10% consistently. Also, do remember that unhandled reports don't mean they haven't been seen or reviewed. Leaving reports unhandled is a perfectly valid option at times. I would estimate (without any evidence of course) that more than 80% of those unhandled reports were seen and reviewed by someone. It could also be based on the time theymos retrieved those stats, it might be that the time theymos retrieves those stats, is a particular hotspot for unhandled reports. Also, some might be in local sections which don't have a dedicated moderator, and therefore no or very little knowledge of the languages between the mods. So, we have to take all those things into consideration.

Personally, I don't think that looks like the mods being overwhelmed. I think we have a little more than 20 moderators including theymos. Lets just say 20 to be safe though. If we take the total of those three periods: 5136 reports and divide that by the amount of mods, thats a little more than 250~ reports across three periods for each moderator. That's a little more than 100 if we take the busiest period of those three for each moderator. That's like a couple reports per moderator each day right?

The height of ICOS and airdrops you might consider it a heavy workload, and a lot got missed then due to sheer amount, but that was when the forum was at its highest activity level. Well before the influx of AI issues, but I don't think the current moderators are overworked per say. Its more like, there's not enough eyes, this was supplemented by a highly active community reporting things, but that has declined over the years, which I would like to see some sort of positive encouragement towards getting more users to report like the report badges or something.


Just for transparency I've handled 2 reports in the last hour (which includes making this post also) and taken 13 actions myself. So, absolutely reports don't make up our entire workload, but that's the only statistics we have to base on when considering whether we are overworked or not.

Why do moderators ignore repeated behavior violations? I have asked multiple times to address these issues but nothing has changed. The Selectively Enforced Rules 3 and 8 BTC are concerning. The forum has guidelines. Rule 3 states no trolling and Rule 8 states no threats. I have noticed threads descend into chaos. People repeatedly break Rules 3 and 8 without facing any consequences like the ones in this post. Broken rules send a message to members raising questions about whether the rules are real or just suggestions. We need consistency. If we want meaningful discussions we cant enforce the rules only when it suits us or when a user is unpopular. Consistency is essential for the platform. If we have Rule 8 a death threat should result in a ban not a discussion. I have noticed that the unofficial rules do not mention AI which I think is a significant issue for the forum. People often interpret arguments differently. It is important to respect varying perspectives. While I recognize that relying solely on AI is not ideal it can improve the quality of many projects. Raw unedited writing can be hard to understand. The initial public response to Bitcoin looks similar to current views on AI. What are moderators plans to do about these issues?