Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

I told it to summarize the book in 500 words and uploaded a pdf with all three books in it.

Quote Post 26

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Elysse Panon wrote:

AI might find a suitable place, but NOTHING replaces the human mind.  We write for people, not machines.  Fake flowers don't compare with the beauty of real ones.  And if we let AI sabotage human efforts, what's left?

Fully agree

Quote Post 27

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

vern wrote:
SolN wrote:

So, I think we have two separate questions.

1. Can AI reviews be helpful? I think the answer is yes. As I've seen on Booksie, AI is good at spotting grammatical problems and can also provide feedback on plot, character development, setting, etc. It has "read" all of the best-selling work out there so knows the formula of what works and what doesn't.

2. Should reviewers use AI to leave reviews on TNBW? I believe the answer is no. When you leave a review, you are representing that you have read the work and are providing "your" opinion, not the opinion and feedback of someone else or a machine.

I've also thought about whether AI will replace human writers. I believe the answer is yes for technical work and potentially some non-fiction. For fiction, I think it might become its own genre - AI Written. I like to use clothing as an analogy. Much of the clothing we wear is made by machines in modern times. But the really valuable clothing is still hand made. Why? Because there is something human in the creation, the stitching, the fabrication and people who wear it find appealing. It's original and unique in a way machine created clothing is not.

This all leads me to two thoughts.

1. Perhaps we need to add some AI feedback to TNBW like what we have with Booksie. I think authors might find it helpful.
2. Reviewers should be be substituting AI for their own feedback. I believe a site where everyone simply pasts AI feedback is a diminished one that one that has no more reason to exist.

Happy to hear all of your thoughts.

Sol

I see nothing wrong or right about AI checking grammar/punctuation since it is simply based on preestablished "rules" and if you use Word, it pretty much does that automatically as you type, but as far as getting into plot, etc., it may have "read" all the bestselling works but I doubt it knows what will be a best seller and simply mimicking best sellers of the past is only giving the reader a regurgitation of what someone else has produced. Creativity, at least for now, is in the realm of humans, not machines. Any use of AI for reviews on this site should be banned in my humble opinion along with the person who submitted it as their own. My opinion outside the machine looking for a wrench to toss in the gears. Take care. Vern

How would such banning work? Would we need an AI program to detect AI? And then what? Have it eliminate one of its “own”? AI programs have shown remarkable abilities in self-preservation, including one instance where a program blackmailed its engineer to prevent him from dismantling it. An advantage of advanced AI is its ability to “learn.” Scary stuff.

Quote Post 28

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

I support having a TNBW-based "AI Reviewer" available. Obviously I don't know how difficult it would be to implement, so I can accept it if it isn't. I use Grok to aid my research, and also as an alpha-reader. And I am fully aware of the weaknesses of it in many regards. I do not use it to create. I may bounce ideas off of it, ask if my characters are consistent, or if my hypothetical consequences make sense, but I don't have it rewrite my stuff (and often curse at it when it tries).

I'd think that hunting down people using AI to review would be nigh impossible anyway. I looked at a couple of "AI detectors" recently and one of the biggest complaints was that they were too inconsistent. It is what it is. If someone is burning through a bunch of reviews too quickly, then maybe? I don't know. All I know is I do my reviews by hand, and I'd hope others would do the same for me. I can't control what anyone else does, nor do I wish to. Too "Big Brother" for my taste. (1984, not the TV show. And yes, I've had to make that clarification more than once in RL.)

Quote Post 29

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

jack the knife wrote:
vern wrote:
SolN wrote:

So, I think we have two separate questions.

1. Can AI reviews be helpful? I think the answer is yes. As I've seen on Booksie, AI is good at spotting grammatical problems and can also provide feedback on plot, character development, setting, etc. It has "read" all of the best-selling work out there so knows the formula of what works and what doesn't.

2. Should reviewers use AI to leave reviews on TNBW? I believe the answer is no. When you leave a review, you are representing that you have read the work and are providing "your" opinion, not the opinion and feedback of someone else or a machine.

I've also thought about whether AI will replace human writers. I believe the answer is yes for technical work and potentially some non-fiction. For fiction, I think it might become its own genre - AI Written. I like to use clothing as an analogy. Much of the clothing we wear is made by machines in modern times. But the really valuable clothing is still hand made. Why? Because there is something human in the creation, the stitching, the fabrication and people who wear it find appealing. It's original and unique in a way machine created clothing is not.

This all leads me to two thoughts.

1. Perhaps we need to add some AI feedback to TNBW like what we have with Booksie. I think authors might find it helpful.
2. Reviewers should be be substituting AI for their own feedback. I believe a site where everyone simply pasts AI feedback is a diminished one that one that has no more reason to exist.

Happy to hear all of your thoughts.

Sol

I see nothing wrong or right about AI checking grammar/punctuation since it is simply based on preestablished "rules" and if you use Word, it pretty much does that automatically as you type, but as far as getting into plot, etc., it may have "read" all the bestselling works but I doubt it knows what will be a best seller and simply mimicking best sellers of the past is only giving the reader a regurgitation of what someone else has produced. Creativity, at least for now, is in the realm of humans, not machines. Any use of AI for reviews on this site should be banned in my humble opinion along with the person who submitted it as their own. My opinion outside the machine looking for a wrench to toss in the gears. Take care. Vern

How would such banning work? Would we need an AI program to detect AI? And then what? Have it eliminate one of its “own”? AI programs have shown remarkable abilities in self-preservation, including one instance where a program blackmailed its engineer to prevent him from dismantling it. An advantage of advanced AI is its ability to “learn.” Scary stuff.

Kind of like any ban would work; if it is detected then the user is banned. If a substance is banned, you obviously can't punish the dealer unless they are caught, but that doesn't eliminate the ban and its usefulness as a deterrent or punishment.  Take care. Vern

Quote Post 30

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Tamsin Liddell wrote:

I support having a TNBW-based "AI Reviewer" available. Obviously I don't know how difficult it would be to implement, so I can accept it if it isn't. I use Grok to aid my research, and also as an alpha-reader. And I am fully aware of the weaknesses of it in many regards. I do not use it to create. I may bounce ideas off of it, ask if my characters are consistent, or if my hypothetical consequences make sense, but I don't have it rewrite my stuff (and often curse at it when it tries).

I'd think that hunting down people using AI to review would be nigh impossible anyway. I looked at a couple of "AI detectors" recently and one of the biggest complaints was that they were too inconsistent. It is what it is. If someone is burning through a bunch of reviews too quickly, then maybe? I don't know. All I know is I do my reviews by hand, and I'd hope others would do the same for me. I can't control what anyone else does, nor do I wish to. Too "Big Brother" for my taste. (1984, not the TV show. And yes, I've had to make that clarification more than once in RL.)

If anything is too Big Brother, then one must ask, "How can you have Big Brother?" without AI? Just saying. Take care. Vern

Quote Post 31

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Hmm, that makes it A-eye.

Quote Post 32

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

In Canada it would be A-eye-eh. Sounds like a refrain from "Old MacDonald had a Farm." :-)

Quote Post 33

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

That would be: A-eye-eh?-eye-Oh!

Quote Post 34

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

This reminded me of a song I learned in kindergarten fifty-five years ago. I never knew the name, just remembered one verse. I fed it into Gemini, and it said, "That's a classic!" and went on to name the song (The Austrian Yodeler) and explain some of the history. I'm so glad to be retired and not have to worry about competing with AI. Yeesh.

Quote Post 35

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

whatta wrote:

I experimented with ChatGPT and found it did a very good job summarizing a 340,000 word trilogy into 500 words—which I used for a query letter.

Wow. I'm impressed. How long did it take to generate the 500 words?

Quote Post 36

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

If members of TNBW are going to start relying on AI to do reviews, I think I'll bow out.

Quote Post 37

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Randall Krzak wrote:

If members of TNBW are going to start relying on AI to do reviews, I think I'll bow out.

Randy, I think the discussion above morphed into one about whether writers (not reviewers) here should have access to an AI reviewer like the one on Booksie. Admittedly, I've yet to try it. I keep meaning to cross-post over there, but life keeps getting in my way.

The general consensus is that AI should not be used to generate reviews for others; that would make for a rather useless site. Writers can do that themselves. Using an AI to clean up chapters before posting them here is a no-brainer, though, for folks who don't have a good handle on grammar and punctuation. That way, reviewers here can focus on the story rather than writing mechanics.

I don't think there's anything wrong, though, with helping someone figure out how to use an AI to clean up a chapter before posting.

Quote Post 38

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

George FLC wrote:
whatta wrote:

I experimented with ChatGPT and found it did a very good job summarizing a 340,000 word trilogy into 500 words—which I used for a query letter.

Wow. I'm impressed. How long did it take to generate the 500 words?

I directed it to 'Think Longer' and it took less than 30 seconds, I'd say (I didn't note the time).

Quote Post 39

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Randall Krzak wrote:

If members of TNBW are going to start relying on AI to do reviews, I think I'll bow out.

Me too. I think Dirk summed up this thread accurately, though. It's more about the (debatable) use of the A-eye tool. Feels like a homogenization of writing would be the result of "written by A-eye" stories.

Just to note, I submitted my five part series with 6 different pdfs: 1 for each book (at 100 words summary each) and another for the entire series (in 500 words). It was interesting to see the difference. There were several instances in the 100-word summaries where some details weren't accurate. Additionally, while it named some characters, it never once mentioned the name Gulliver. Some part of that may have been affected by adding "and the further travels of Gulliver" to the title after I had already made the pdfs. Maybe I'll run it through again and see if it notices.

I should also mention that it didn't give the last book, (a novel at 103,000 words) and imo the whole crux of the biscuit, the attention it deserves. For me, the denouement is a large factor in determining how good I think a story is. (I weigh the style of writing heavier than the storyline. It can have a crap ending if the style carries me. I'm looking at you, Tolstoy. See also: Bukowski, whose endings were just another day in his life.) A-eye doesn't value the denouement with any amount of preference (or, shall we say, emotion).

Also of note: I resubmitted Book 1 by itself and it referenced details from the other books! That's kinda unnerving. It's A-eye-and-ear, in actuality, by definition, I guess.

Anywho, I'm just collecting snippets and putting them together with some suggestions from a pro on the site and editing (read: muddling) my way through to some sort of perfect query letter for two books (Street of Rogues, a 3-volume memoir which includes Tropical Cancer, and the Noble Book of Lindsay the Tall &...). Sad to note: I've actually worked longer on the 'perfect' query letter for Street... than I have on the book.

And I'm totally with all of us here on this thread; the idea of stylistically homogenous books generated by an average of "norms" is horrifying -- Orwellian, even. I like to think, in my optimistic way, that creative, unique, and ground-breaking writing will continue to find a place with courageous publishers.

Carry on,
whatta

Quote Post 40

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Randall Krzak wrote:

If members of TNBW are going to start relying on AI to do reviews, I think I'll bow out.

This isn't even a debate. I enjoy aspects of author's writings. And I want to let the author know what I think.

At times I've changed my style or approach based on how others write.  I want to grow as an author. How can I do that if an AI is doing everything?

I love to learn and create. I want to keep on doing that.

George FLC

Quote Post 41

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

When AI starts telling all supporters of Trump how and why they should get rid of Trump in no uncertain terms any time he is mentioned, I might start believing it has merit in any type of communication. Take care. Vern

Quote Post 42

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

vern wrote:

When AI starts telling all supporters of Trump how and why they should get rid of Trump in no uncertain terms any time he is mentioned, I might start believing it has merit in any type of communication. Take care. Vern

Wow... President Trump lives rent free in your head.

Quote Post 43

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Jonathan Swift and Dostoevsky would have a field day today with satire and psychology (respectively). Unashamed self-plug: the Lindsay book is a lot inspired by Swift's satire (also cartoons, and definitely Dr. Seuss). My spidey sense shudders with the notion that satire (as a writer's self-defense mechanism in Swift's time) may be coming back into vogue. That's what lives in my head these days.

Quote Post 44

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

I wasn’t sure if AI is educated enough to distinguish the nuances of satire. (Or perhaps its algorithm is intimidated by potential libel suits? That, in itself, would be a form of censorship.) So I asked its opinion of the following graf:

“There have been Experts in the past who have proposed a study as to the differences, if any, between Royalty and Commonality. What distinguishes itself one from the other? Does Royalty have an extra eye, ear or nose? What makes them special, do you suppose? However, the funding for a study of that magnitude and import never materialized. Funds for that came from Royalty and they had little interest in the concept of Commonality.”

…and it replied: “This paragraph strikes me as playful, ironic, and satirical in tone. Here’s my breakdown of what it conveys:” (etcetera). 

So it did get the point and was correct in identifying it as satire, but never mentioned the satire aspect of the entire book in its 500 word summary of all 217,000 words.

If you want to include satire (for example, or a different element in your story) as a selling point in a query letter or summary, you can do that by having it comment on a specific graf and edit the query/summary to include it.

Quote Post 45

46 Reply by Tamsin Liddell (edited by Tamsin Liddell 2025-09-23 13:20:33)

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

You should ask it to assess "A Modest Proposal."

Quote Post 46

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Or Gulliver’s Travels — arguably the best piece of satire ever written.

Quote Post 47

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

J.R. Geiger wrote:
vern wrote:

When AI starts telling all supporters of Trump how and why they should get rid of Trump in no uncertain terms any time he is mentioned, I might start believing it has merit in any type of communication. Take care. Vern

Wow... President Trump lives rent free in your head.

LOL, hardly rent free; he pays a substantial price to tone me down. Take care. Vern

Quote Post 48

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

Looks like someone else used AI to generate a review. I'm guessing they didn't see this thread.

My suggestion for anyone who receives an AI-generated review, especially one that the reviewer doesn't even admit came from an AI, is:
- let them know that the site policy (as articulated by Sol earlier in this thread) is no AI-generated reviews
- let them know that you (the author) are looking for thoughtful, constructive feedback from humans who have actually read your work
- remind them that the AI almost certainly keeps a copy of the work the reviewer submitted to the AI, and if that copy of your work gets integrated into the AI going forward, then the reviewer has violated the author's copyright

- most important, tell them you don't reciprocate in response to AI reviews

Quote Post 49

Re: Using AI to do reviews? Please don't.

How does one identify an AI review?

Quote Post 50