To be suspicious about these very similar posts

[FfaCoff]

All in AIBU, all following a similar formula all with names that are very formulaic too - 3 random words.

So is it mumsnet planting AI written posts to generate discussion?

The same person constantly name changing?

What do we reckon?

Image to follow btw - it's under review

Very suss! Traffic generation by mumsnet hq I'd say

I think the 3 random words is auto generated user names.
New members might not know you can choose your own user name.
Maybe?

I signed up having deleted my account for a bit recently and it suggested 3 usernames, all 3 random words. "MyRedDreamer" and "ThisSpryPoet" were 2 of them.

There has been at least one post on here that generated a LOT of traffic in which I suspect the poster used AI to write the original post and most replies. It was pretty ridiculous. I have a suspicion that either mumsnet or an external party could be harvesting “advice”-type of text to create a bot of some kind.

or a journalist

The thing giving me the suss these days is an OP posting some issue they want advice on and then never coming back. Journalists trawling for stories vibes! Seem to be loads of them recently!

Well the user name generator sort of makes it odder - people signing up with new accounts starting very similar posts?? And yes, the op either only posts once or twice or disappears completely.

I'm starting to think the only posts worth replying to are ones where the OP has either posted a few times on the tread already, or showed some other sign of being a regular. Bring back the days of stating "cutted up pear, sistine chapel, penis beaker" to establish one's credentials! 😀

Was it a post with a religious theme? If so it was blatantly AI, but then tons of posts on here are blatantly AI these days. As someone who works with AI daily, I can spot them a mile off and I have to sit on my hands not to say anything.

It's generated content to drive traffic to the site. If it becomes popular it will then appear on the Mumsnet Facebook page, and might get picked up as a 'news' story which then brings more traffic to the site and increases ad revenue.

If it's free, you're the product...

Well spotted. Definitely.

Unless it's a very new post with few replies then I look to see if the OP has a "see next" on their first post. If it's several pages and OP hasn't returned then I don't even bother reading it.

That’s definitely weird!

We need an AI-spotters checklist! 😀

I actually wouldn't object if Mumsnet were honest about it though? They should post it from a Mumsnet account. It feels deceitful (if it is them)

They're suggested names when joining. Newspapers are using that system too.

It wasn’t religious. The layout was so formulaic, particularly the layout of the various rebuttals.

Yes! Or ‘cube of poo’ or ‘tiny Korean woman’ 😂

If you read People.com you'll find a lot of stories lifted from Mumsnet

Lots of em dashes is a good one. As is overly “neutral” language.

Lots of fillers.
Starting with phrases like “okay so” or let’s be honest.”

Repetition and filler.

Lack of personality, but also too much personality that doesn’t seem authentic.

But really, it’s just that if you read a lot of it, you can just tell. It all sounds very same-y in a way I find hard to pinpoint but can pretty regularly spot!

Cube of poo?! Heck that sounds like a good one and I've clearly missed it!

Ah, there was a religious one that had the same issues. They were also able to write really long replies really fast, which was another tell.

Awesome, thanks!

None of these things are “proof” in-and-of-themselves, but the typical hallmarks of AI-generated text (particularly ChatGPT) are:

1. em-dashes—e.g., a double dash, often without a space before and after, like this.
2. US spellings.
3. Tripartite lists (I’m crossing my fingers, legs, and eyes).
4. Oxford comma (example above)
5. Very structured text - lots of headed paragraphs, particularly when the subheaders are bold.
6. Concluding sentences at the end of most paragraphs.
7. Might refer to “experts” or “studies” without specifying what they were, though this is also so common with humans that it might not belong in this list!
8. Often follows a rigid format: introduction, three body points, conclusion — even when not appropriate.
9. Each paragraph may be the same length or rhythmically similar.

I used AI to generate the last two points. 😅