Article Writing and AI

[Mary Whalen]

It's been a very long time since I've written an article, so I don't have much personal dog in this fight. But I do enjoy reading some folks articles and so like reading up on new players take on getting to know the game. If getting a team of editors isn't an option to weed out any article that's not up to snuff for print I do like the idea of either ranking basing how much money an article is worth. Or lowing or eliminating them getting paid but offer the ability of readers to leave a tip of sorts up to the current payment for an article. This will reward those that put effort into articles and hopefully not get abused if you enable a cap of how much they can be tipped.

[Meghan Kingsley]

As a new player, the articles were a HUGE help to me both to learn, and to boost my bank account when it was needed. I was saddened to see that submissions had been halted because one of my goals for this coming year was to try to write at least a couple of articles a week. I also refer to articles from experienced players when I have questions, and really enjoy checking in to see what new ones are posted every day. I'd be very sad to see them discontinued entirely.

I was doing some thinking on the problem. I suspect the bigger issue here may be that for many players, lack of income is a real concern.

1.) Is lack of revenue for newer players the underlying issue? I'm not talking new as in beginner-- I'm thinking more along the line of those of us who have been playing a year or two or three who still struggle with funds. What if instead of encouraging article writing for the newish players, they would get more infusions of funds from the SIM-- especially after Trial Park runs out. I know my struggles with finances arose a season or two after TP. That slog between 'easy money' as a new player and a healthy bank account once the easier race options fall away is a long one... I've played nearly two years and still struggle financially to keep my stable solvent and purchase an occasional decent horse or high-end stud fee. Veteran players have told me it is much harder to be successful financially than in the past with most divisions, and that many are hesitant to help newer players because those newer players tend to quit after a few months. That may point to a bigger issue-- if upcoming players think there is no possible way they will ever make enough to pay a stud fee to a top stallion, buy a nice broodmare, or purchase a promising youngster that could one day be a G1 winner, there's not much incentive to continue.

If people are resorting to writing AI articles just to raise funds to the point where it's become problematic, perhaps the bigger issue is that it can be really hard to keep a solvent stable, especially as one tries to improve stats or acquire better horses. Are the problem AI-article players from a subset of users time-wise? Is there a time period in the game where statistically newer players tend to drop out? I've played some games in the past where players who log on daily receive a weekly bonus if your account balance is below a certain point (making sure that players who need it get it, but those who have untold millions don't). Might that make more sense than articles for players in their first couple of years of play? Would changing the exchange rate help? Without a big-earning horse or stallion bringing in stud fees, it's really hard to stay afloat. Heck, the only reason I'm still here is the generosity of more experienced players. I've been disheartened SO many times to see an ever-dwindling balance in spite of all my efforts. It's become a bit easier the last few months, but I considered quitting more than once.

2.) Allow article writing/submissions only from players who have been logging in regularly as players for at least six months.

3.) AI is an evolving landscape and a struggle for everyone as it becomes more common. AI-checkers can be inaccurate; both with false positive and negative results. If it's obvious players are submitting numerous AI articles, could an article-writing suspension for that account be implemented? If the problematic accounts are newer ones, could an approval process for only the newer accounts be in place? Is it a possibility to add a 'report' feature to articles so readers could report obviously non-factual or error-filled articles so the account could be reviewed if enough are received?

4.) The simplest fix would be to add a warning that AI-generated articles will not be accepted and submitting them could result in suspension or the closure of one's account. If that doesn't solve the majority of the problem, then other solutions may have to be considered.

[Lori Hamill]

.

[Danny Derby]

Any updates on this?

[The Steward]

Any updates on this?

The admin has been asked to re-open this, with new official statement going at the same time.

[Cheri Stewart]

AI isnt going away, but my honest question is this..... If we can only submit 4 articles a week, it's not like people are getting paid more for it. They are doing a crap job, yeah. But nobody's losing money over this (right? Idk if it loses anyone money besides those of us who are still trying to figure out how to actually win)..... So why halt the articles? Is it legal? Like they're committing plagiarism? I'm going to assume there is some sort of fix, and we'll get it fixed because the people who run this game are amazing. But at what cost.... Everyone who actually is writing this as a type of income are the ones getting screwed. And we want the same thing.... articles written by effort and not cheating. Also, for the record, I hate AI. As a photographer, there is so much intellectual theft that goes into it (whether intentional or not) and I won't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

[Cheri Stewart]

My vote is to just put a note in bold red text that AI generated text will not be accepted and the feature race editor has absolutely final decision. Allow resubmission of articles rewritten/edited to have appropriate flow and context.

This

[Katie Stepanian]

So the two most recent articles were apparently written by different new players- Tom Calthorpe and Jeremy A. fitzgerald, but are pretty identical in format and content (worded slightly differently). One of these new players joined in March and has had twelve starts, no wins, no placings, no earnings- but writes ‘Don’t give up…’

Tom joined three days ago, but also has the same pearls of wisdom…

When I joined, it stated the articles were proof-read and approved for publishing, to maintain quality and accuracy of content- I don’t know if that was the case, but the standard of articles is now poor on the whole, unless written by someone who has played for a significant amount of time. I get it is useful for new players to generate some extra income, and I used it myself a bit at the start, but surely it’s the monitoring of the articles that is needed. This will weed out AI and wholly inaccurate articles, or ones that are just a load of rambling, or ones written by two random ‘new’ players who seemed to have signposted themselves as the same person, to what gain I have no idea… This leads to the issue of time and moderation- I get that time isn’t available for that amongst everything the small SIM team has to do, but we definitely need a way to stop articles like the last two getting through.

[Mr. Lord Rich]

So the two most recent articles were apparently written by different new players- Tom Calthorpe and Jeremy A. fitzgerald, but are pretty identical in format and content (worded slightly differently). One of these new players joined in March and has had twelve starts, no wins, no placings, no earnings- but writes ‘Don’t give up…’

Tom joined three days ago, but also has the same pearls of wisdom…

When I joined, it stated the articles were proof-read and approved for publishing, to maintain quality and accuracy of content- I don’t know if that was the case, but the standard of articles is now poor on the whole, unless written by someone who has played for a significant amount of time. I get it is useful for new players to generate some extra income, and I used it myself a bit at the start, but surely it’s the monitoring of the articles that is needed. This will weed out AI and wholly inaccurate articles, or ones that are just a load of rambling, or ones written by two random ‘new’ players who seemed to have signposted themselves as the same person, to what gain I have no idea… This leads to the issue of time and moderation- I get that time isn’t available for that amongst everything the small SIM team has to do, but we definitely need a way to stop articles like the last two getting through.

The sim has forum moderators, why not enlist vet players for article moderators?

[Nicole Marie]

When I joined, it stated the articles were proof-read and approved for publishing, to maintain quality and accuracy of content- I don’t know if that was the case, but the standard of articles is now poor on the whole

Yeah, I had been under the impression too that they are edited, but some of the ones published last sim year were barely intelligible at times, either spelling wise or it was just so obviously AI since more of the information was wrong. I used to read every article but I hardly ever read them anymore unless I know the author.

[The Steward]

The articles were moderated by a SIM player for many years. She relinquished the job to the Entry Clerk, but I may not have properly explained they need to be read/fixed up. It should be better going forward.

[Andrew Chillin]

The articles were moderated by a SIM player for many years. She relinquished the job to the Entry Clerk, but I may not have properly explained they need to be read/fixed up. It should be better going forward.

Double whiskeys again? Nice