Not all the active users on the list are marked as using AI. I would like to clarify, if they were caught once, what should they expect in case of repeated, regular use of AI? Some do not have a tag at all, and some have a neutral one. Will neutral tags turn into a negative tag? Many of the users always ask to be warned before leaving a tag. Are neutral tags a warning?

I would ask that reports be accepted only after checking three or more tools, as we see frequent false positives.  People end up on the AI ​​spammer list, sometimes purely by accident.

I suggest starting a search for new detectors that could replace them, such as sapling.ai, as it is practically useless, and its results are posted only formally for the sake of quantity.

Perhaps I wasn't very specific. Active means that they're still active on the forum, having a latest post history within the past 30 days. That doesn't necessarily mean that they're still using AI, but they are users who have been reported at least once and the report was accurate. It doesn't mean that they're still using AI, I want to clear this misunderstanding. This is the reason why I've added links to their profiles, so anyone can easily click on the user and see for themselves if they're still suspicious or not.

With a glance, some profiles still show signs of AI usage, but I haven't gone through to check, it's just that some posts stand out without requiring me to go through a detector.

Also, I personally not going to report someone who's giving me mixed results. I'll first check, do their posts look suspicious? If yes, proceed to the next step, start scanning them. If I can't produce satisfactory results (for instance 4 out of 5 detectors showing that they're AI written) they go to my watch list so I can check again in the future. In the meantime, I'll check older posts to see if there's a difference in their writing style and pattern.

Perhaps that's for the mods to decide, I'm not sure if I'm the right person to answer that. Maybe @Igetbotz can shed some light to this topic. From my perspective, those who are not using AI anymore may be subject to change their reputation status, still a neutral tag but mentioning that they used to use AI? Any thoughts about this? In my opinion, repeated users, especially newer ranks, up to Member could result in a temporary or permanent banned, depending on the user or the case.

I'd like to hear more opinions about this matter, and perhaps I'll start checking a few of the active users myself.

Those sound like quite discretionary matters, including how the forum might treat the use of AI matter, since there are some members who have more egregious incidents than others, and they might even have other areas that they are breaking forum rules that justify more extreme sanctions against them.

With tags, if there were one or two incidents, but then the member might have had come clean or at least not had further incidents, then some members might choose to remove the tag, yet surely some members leave tags for extended periods of time too and might prefer to keep something like a neutral tag in order to serve as a reminder.  Part of my own personal reason for not tagging members very frequently is that I feel that I would need to create another system for keeping track, which surely takes time to accomplish, but then the removal of tags might have some other reasoning besides what is written in the tag.. and surely we likely see that some members might have very shitty writing styles that don't seem to improve very much with the passage of time, and other members might improve in their substantive contributions to the forum and then justify the removal of the tag in the eyes of the person who put the tag in the first place..   

I got some other posts, but usually, I just report the posts when I make sure they are AI content after using three tools or even more.
Based on what I saw from him, I think it's clear he used AI sometimes. However, I'm not sure about copy-pasting. I can still check this user for a few days to make sure about the next posts.
In fact, that's the main reason I asked @Ultegra134 for the list (Thanks again for it).

I'll start monitoring the people on this list. But usually, when someone gets reported, I think he will stop using AI.

---

User: BlockExplorer24
I could find even more from this user


undetectable: 99%
gptzero: 100%
sapling: 100%
stealthwriter: 100%
copyleaks: 100% AI Content Found



undetectable: 99%
gptzero: 100%
sapling: 100%
stealthwriter: 75%
originality: 100%



quillbot: 100%
undetectable: 99%
copyleaks: 100% AI Content Found
stealthwriter: 100%
gptzero:100%
sapling: 100%



undetectable: 99%
copyleaks: 100% AI Content Found
stealthwriter: 100%
sapling: 100%
gptzero:100%



quillbot: 100%
undetectable: 99%
copyleaks: 100% AI Content Found
stealthwriter: 100%
sapling: 100%
gptzero:100%



copyleaks: 100% AI Content Found
stealthwriter: 100%
sapling: 100%
undetectable: 99%



quillbot: 100%
undetectable: 99%
copyleaks: 100% AI Content Found
stealthwriter: 100%
sapling: 100%
gptzero:100%



undetectable: 99%
copyleaks: 100% AI Content Found
stealthwriter: 100%
sapling: 100%
gptzero:100%

I am not going to claim to be any kind of saint with my tolerance of the posts of new members, since some kinds of post contents will trigger me more into a hostile response, yet there are forum members with various backgrounds and various abilities to express themselves, and surely some of the members will improve in their perspectives and also their abilities to express themselves in ways that are potentially helpful to other members.  

Sometimes members will also explain their own process of coming around to bitcoin or searching for ways to get bitcoin in their own country, and perhaps on some grander level, we might consider their experiences to NOT be very interesting, yet if we consider what they are saying within their own timeline of learning about bitcoin, we might be able to recognize how they might have gone down some worse road, but then learned how to adjust and perhaps reroute their own journey in such a way that some of the newer members might be able to relate to their perspectives - including the various paths that they had to take along the way.

Some new members might also have a lot of bad and even dumb ideas at various points in their journey to bitcoin, yet after they go back and forth arguing about their perspectives, they might also come to realize that they need to tweak some of their ways of thinking and including following up with better practices, such as starting to buy bitcoin regularly or something else that might relate to investing into bitcoin rather than either trying to trade bitcoin or get sucked into various shitcoins... and some of their journey might involve getting distracted into some bad ways of thinking about bitcoin and perhaps not even knowing what bitcoin is, and perhaps relevant to this thread, some of them might make mistakes of overly relying on the assistance of AIs to write their posts, which surely would be problematic if they don't end up correcting their ways if they are going down some of those kinds of paths.

I have a friend in real life who from time to time, I request to submit reports to me about certain topics related to his studying projects (like early college level kinds of reports), and this friend, submits me very shitty reports that I believe are either written by AI and/or the friend is copy and pasting ideas from various articles and proclaiming that he had written them...and to me it is just gibberish or seemingly coming from some other person (as compared to my regular interactions with the person, whether in writing or in person). When I tell him that he needs to figure out ways to write better reports so that he can improve himself and to create his own ideas rather than copying and pasting a bunch of blather, he sometimes will still insist that he had done the work, even though I continue to say that his report is not at a good enough standard and it does not have the right kind of a feel to it, yet he may well continue to act as if he had written the report, which truly cannot be true, based on the way that the report had been written...

So what I am trying to say is that it can take folks a long time to motivate themselves to want to learn how to do the work of thinking for themselves and also to spend time to attempt to present their own ideas in ways that are interesting rather than copying and pasting or relying on some kinds of cheating mechanisms that results in gibberish that is not even reflective of their own thoughts and/or ideas.

I don't even have any problems with some people having boring and dumb ideas as long as they are coming up with the ideas themselves and they are attempting in measures to organize and present their ideas rather than either copy and pasting from some other source, or using some kind of an AI service that results in a mish-mash of ideas from others and perhaps having a few of their ideas also interweaved within the presentation(s).

My native language is English, and many years I have been learning Spanish, so frequently if I write in Spanish,  I will write my first draft in Spanish, and then I will look at its translation in English and then have some translation program give me suggestions about how to write it better in Spanish, so then I am learning how to say my thoughts in a better way in Spanish but at the same time, most of the time, I had written the original draft in Spanish and I don't always accept all of the suggested changes to my version.  In my earlier years of using those programs, I still would try to write my own version in Spanish first, yet I knew that when I was in a hurry, I might just write my version in English first, and then see how it is translated. Surely it was easier to write the draft in English first, but if I wrote the draft in English first, then I would not tend to learn anything from the process of using the translator tool, and so I still believe that the process of reading and/or writing becomes easier when we figure out how to do some of the practicing in ways that we learn, and it will also help us to improve oral comprehension and speaking skills too.  

There are likely forum members who have gotten much better in English over the years through their forum interactions, yet surely some forum members are more disciplined than others to make sure that they are ongoingly learning how to understand the posts of others and how to express themselves better so that they are not speaking in gibberish, so we might not even realize that their in-person English skills are not very good.. because they are using the translation tools to help themselves to learn and they get better and better in their own post-drafting skills (and likely their reading comprehension in English improves too).

Too bad for you... but it is so nice that you felt that you needed to get that off your chest.

I often read your posts don't get it wrong; I was already tired from work when I read your recent one here. Too bad for me I guess.