Several AI written reviews have made it through and the fake bullshit pisses me off.
If adjudicators don't know the club, a vague AI review sometimes slips through.
These fake club reviewers need to be banned.
Several AI written reviews have made it through and the fake bullshit pisses me off.
If adjudicators don't know the club, a vague AI review sometimes slips through.
These fake club reviewers need to be banned.
Comments
last commentIf plagiarism results in a ban, so should submitting an AI review.
Log in to vote
You could DM founder, that's the only recourse if it's through adjudication.
One thing I think we need to distinguish is the difference between a review that was AI polished and one that is a full on AI invention.
The later type of review will contain no new useful information on the PEOPLE, PLACE, or PRICES. The former type of review can actually be quite useful, better even than an incoherent review.
The best thing adjudicators can do is just be really strict on reviews meeting the criteria spelled out in the review guidelines.
Log in to vote
AI polish is acceptable (though I think it's kind of lame).
The full on AI-invented review should be a perma-ban.
There were ones for Treasures Greensboro and Mirage recently that were complete fabrications, without a single correct detail.
Log in to vote
IMO, it would help if people who didn't know clubs didn't adjudicate them. There's been a number of fake reviews for clubs around here, not necessarily AI written but anyone whose been to the club knows the reviewer clearly hasn't been. When 75% of the details in the review are objectively wrong, and 75% of the subjective comments are out of character, you know it's fake. AI or not.
Log in to vote
There are so many fake reviews on here it doesnt matter
Log in to vote
I’ve said that before and it’s probably not feasible for all reviewers to be able to be familiar with the club, but it might help if there was at least one reviewer familiar with the club which might be difficult for some of the rarely reviewed clubs, but here is a suggestion that might work, what if founder were to have members who could be trusted members get some sort of mention and when they approve a review, it would make the review an approved review by virtue of their upvote.
Log in to vote
I don't think we need any extra approver power. It's not like there are quality reviews getting rejected, we saw the evidence of that when the site was showing rejected reviews.
I'd be for a "report" button on published reviews. But honestly I still like the thumbs up/thumbs down for reviews, combined with an easy way to filter out reviews that get a number or percentage of thumbs down.
Log in to vote
Call ‘em out in the comments to the review, and, for repeat offenders, call ‘em out in a discussion post. It also affords to poster a chance to defend themselves
Log in to vote