I’ve been noticing an influx of AI-generated titles, descriptions, and supporting info. Has there been any clarification or stance given about how to handle these yet? In my opinion, these would qualify as low quality and thus be ineligible, but as long as the photo itself is real, should it be valid?
1 Like
I can’t give you a blanket statement on ai text, not even how to recognize it. If the title or description text is lifted directly from a website, you can reject. If the title or description is irrelevant to the wayspot, or untrue, you can reject it. Otherwise, I do know people who like to use every character available to them in those sections, and some text I was sure was ai has turned out not to be.
AI generated text can be extremely useful for those who do not have a good vocabulary or are trying to write in a language that is not their first one. I don’t recommend using it, but I would not want to outright ban it, even if I could always recognize it.
7 Likes
This will depend on each case individually.
Is the AI generated text inaccurate? Does it make sense?
AI generated text is not generally ruled out. Ideally people would use it to assist writing instead of just blindly copy & pasting it.
3 Likes
While AI-generated titles, descriptions, and supporting information may raise concerns about quality, the focus for Wayspot nominations should primarily be on the physical location and the supporting photo. As long as the photo accurately represents a real, eligible place and meets the criteria, it can still be valid.
However, the quality of the submitted title and description plays a role in the overall assessment. AI-generated content, while it can help improve wording or clarity, should still align with the nomination criteria and provide accurate, relevant context. If the AI-generated content feels artificial or doesn’t contribute meaningfully to the understanding of the location, it could potentially affect the nomination’s quality score.
Ultimately, it’s important to use good judgment when rating these nominations—ensure that the submission is genuine, the photo is of a real and eligible location, and the descriptive content provides value to the nomination. If in doubt, focus on the quality of the photo and the relevance of the information provided.
4 Likes
yes, I asked chatgpt to answer that question
4 Likes
Thanks chatGPT
3 Likes
My writing is very similar to the AI texts and I fear for my own outputs when similarity scores are high (without using AI). I wonder how are others like me are doing.
1 Like
Welcome to the forum, btw! Very interesting question.
Welcome!
The rules for text are outlined already, and they don’t change with the introduction of AI and don’t need further expansion imo. Copyrighted or offensive text is outright banned. Low effort poor text remains poor text, AI-generated or not, and should be evaluated as such. The ones that are obvious, as you mention, are obvious because it is rare that AI will correctly provide the kind of context that was missing in the nomination before AI treatment, so while I’m pretty skeptical about what it brings in the context of Wayfarer, it’s not so much about the tool as it is about the users’ understanding of what makes a good nomination. At the end of the day many nominations struggle because reviewers need to see pretty specific information that would address concerns specific to the nomination (how do I find this on satellite? how do I prove this is really the community hotspot the submitter says it is?), not because they are missing gushing walls of robotic text, so the added value is pretty minimal if not negative. (Making things verbose and hard to read on purpose is unkind to the reviewers and I’m sure can very well result in rejections.)
What is “bad” or “unrelated to the wayspot” is different in each specific case, so here it would be helpful to see examples - share one if you are unsure and I’m sure the community can offer opinions on whether that kind of text is appropriate in that specific instance.
Tl;dr like with IRL activities, you won’t have to ask yourself that question if the text is good in the first place and addresses all the points you would like to see as a reviewer.
5 Likes
Why would you even bother to use an AI to write the title and description? It’s probably easier to write it yourself, unless your language skills aren’t very good.
You answered your own question there.
The style is quite distinctive, so I figured you did! I dont think I could spot it on 3 lines of text as easily though
Theres a lot more reasons than just language skills. ChatGPT can be a great tool to help you learn more about a waypoint, can be more creative, can act a thesaurus, can help elongate or shorten a title or description. Some of us have permanent “writers block”.
4 Likes
I have still never used ChatGPT or any of the other standalone things
My phone has AI built in to the keyboard part so I can highlight text and use the AI to spellcheck or if I wanted to change the writing style but I have really just used spellcheck because the writing style makes it sound like AI wrote it entirely. No idea what composer does. Never clicked it
1 Like
As an English prof I support this use of AI. Seriously.
4 Likes
What does ChatGPT know about your wayspot? Unless you are writing a description for something really well known - which is probably a wayspot - then an LLM AI simply isn’t going to know enough to write an accurate description. Sure, you might get something that looks feasible but is all completely hallucinated.
I’d sooner see a minimal description than AI-generated slop, but that’s just my opinion.
1 Like
Have you used chatgpt/AI recently? It knows a lot. When you use it to assist in searches, reverse inage searches etc… very often it knows a lot. And if you really know how to feed it, it can be extremely accurate.
fwiw, you can change the hallucinations. The sentence construction from the prompt is retrofitted with specifics provided by the human. Or vice versa, specific words from the prompt which the human retrofits in their sentence accordingly.
AI is there to assist people, I don’t see any errors on using it to make a description and info with it.
Thanks to the people who have a **** brains, others who are legit trying to nominate a legitimate place are being discouraged because you can’t give a proper judgement, the players are trying to nominate a spot where it’s safe, has value and a hang out for people to gather.
Then here you are giving a very **** just denying it without a proper thought.
Mod Edit: Removed some inappropriate words. Please read FAQ.
I rarely use AI for anything that has to do with writing. I’ve never used it for Wayspot nominations, and most likely won’t start anytime soon.
I also think I’d have a hard time tell if a title or description was written by AI, but maybe supporting info, especially if it’s very similar to the description. Otherwise, I think it would be hard for me to tell what is written by AI and what isn’t.