Should I be reporting AI-generated nonsense responses?

[TDK]

In instances where they don't answer the question, or where they answer it incorrectly, I have been reporting these. Should I keep doing so?

Does the ST community have a stance on whether or not AI-generated reponses are allowed? Is that stance in the guidelines and if not, can we put it there?

For example, clearly this is ChatGPT generated nonsense:

Another one, same thread even.

At first glance it seems like these answer the question, but they fall apart under inspection. These two are obvious, some are less so.

[Peter BENSCH]

@waclawek.jan Yes, it was auto-deleted and so access to it is no longer possible. That's the only slightly confusing thing, that you get an email about a reply to a thread you were active in and then the reply in question is already in nirvana.

Even more unpleasant is when someone has already replied to it in between and only the spam is deleted.

[Tesla DeLorean]

I report any that I'm sure are bots. Some disappear more quickly than others, and I assume Peter is generally on top of alerts whenever they come in.

I'd like to hope that 3 or 4 users flagging "inappropriate" posts would be sufficient to down vote them out of general visibility, but again this assumes a functional forum implementation.

The Policy thread was pretty good, and read only, so I'm not sure why it disappeared, and I was left with the Mandela Effect of having seen it but unable to find it again to prove I'm not insane..

[TDK]

I reported this one but it didn't get deleted, and then it got accepted as the solution. Great. Long term, if that happens more and more frequently, I don't know if I'll want to participate.

[Peter BENSCH]

@TDK Sorry that it took a little longer: the post has already gone to the eternal hunting grounds. I kindly ask you to forgive us for the delay (due to weekends, holidays, ...) and continue to report such findings.

Kind regards
/Peter

[Lina DABASINSKAITE]

Hello @Tesla DeLorean , 

After publishing the guidelines, we noticed that an additional clarification is necessary. We will put them back once done. Apologies for this confusion 🙂

[Lina DABASINSKAITE]

Hi @TDK , 

Adding to what Peter said, your reports are highly appreciated, and we act on it within a business day. Thanks a lot!

Greetings,
Lina

[Laurids_PETERSEN]

Hi everyone,

As @Lina DABASINSKAITE mentioned, it was important for us that our terms and conditions were in line with our policy regarding generative AI.

The guidelines are now back online:
https://community.st.com/t5/community-guidelines/why-predominantly-ai-generated-posts-and-replies-on-the-st/ta-p/633785 

Thanks for your patience, and for your continued efforts to report AI-generated posts and replies.

Best regards,
Laurids 

[Andrew Neil]

@Laurids_PETERSEN - perhaps need a new option in the reporting 'Reason' drop-down?

[Tesla DeLorean]

I'd like to see it just be called "Report Content / Material"

And an option along the lines of "Review by Moderator" for stuff that's not Inappropriate, but needs someone to get on top of quickly, or assigned to appropriate staff.

There's a limit to what we can triage from the outside, but there are things that have enough gravity or recurrence that someone on staff needs to jump on.

I can click on "Something else" if we all understand that carries sufficient weight, and doesn't black mark the respondents in whatever secret metrics the back-end is reporting internally.

[waclawek.jan]

@Laurids_PETERSEN, not related to this thread materially but related to Andrew's above suggestion, can the list also contain "not inappropriate content, but in inappropriate forum" option (i.e. a suggestion to move given thread to a more appropriate place)?

Thanks,

JW