[janekm]

Giving moderators the power to arbitrarily ban users they deem to have produced content by AI is not likely to work for long though. Perhaps today it's still feasible to note the "vibe" for GPT, but that's not likely to be possible for long (it's probably an artefact of the RLHF process anyway). Then what? You'll end up with essentially arbitrary application of the ban hammer based on the moderators' "feelings".

I certainly don't have the answers (and let's face it it's likely going to be a problem here too).

[alwaysbeconsing]

> is not likely to work for long though.

This is true, and it's why the policy promulgated by the moderators was explicitly temporary. It was a response to an acute problem to give everyone time to figure out how to handle it as a chronic condition: https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/421831/temporary-po...

[ohgodplsno]

>You'll end up with essentially arbitrary application of the ban hammer based on the moderators' "feelings".

So, like the current organisation of things, that works quite well? You put entirely too much value on moderators being perfect. Moderators have been biased forever, have banned for no reason forever. It's a website, you can live with that (or without it). If they're unreasonable, move away, find another place or create another place. If you can't move away, deal with it, create an alt, don't get caught doing the same thing that got you banned, and that'll be it.