Let's get the disclosure out of the way: I wrote this with AI. This exact post went through the three rounds in the title, so if it reads clean, th...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
I think the most interesting risk isn’t that AI sounds like us—it’s that, over time, we start sounding like AI. Once you’ve edited hundreds of AI-assisted drafts, it’s surprisingly easy to internalize the same rhythms, transitions, and sentence structures yourself. The challenge isn’t only preserving your voice today, but noticing when your own writing gradually converges toward the model’s statistical average.
Ooooh, a hundred percent yes! This works perfectly if you're running not a personal page but, say, a company's — when the tone of voice, structure, and rules are already established. But personal ones should still stay personal. Plus 1000 to your comment.
Exactly. A company is trying to maintain a consistent brand voice, while a personal account is trying to preserve an individual one. The irony is that the better AI gets at imitating us, the more valuable our genuinely human quirks become. Those little imperfections are often what make a piece memorable.
100%!
Absolutely. As I had the AI continuously revise and iterate, I found that its writing started to resemble my style, and my writing began to resemble its style more and more as well. What’s even more disappointing is that one day my friend showed me her article, but I didn’t recognize that it was text that had been run through an AI model several times.
Oh yeah, it's getting harder and harder to create texts that are unique in style. And even if you manage to, someone will still say it's definitely made by AI.
You can tell right away when certain phrases are used I'm the one behind trimy.io and I can say I spend a lot of time rewriting stuff to make it sound less like it was written by a machine before I put my name on i, there's just something about the way the words are put together the rhythm is too perfect, the lines are too neat. I can spot it in just a few seconds now.
Reading it out loud is the best test. If it sounds like something I'd say to a person, it stays. If it sounds like a summary of what I'd say, it goes.
Great! We're alike in this — I do the same :)
I couldn't agree more, Eugeniya . I've had a version of this happen to me too, an essay about AI detection getting flagged by DEV.to's own moderation for the same reason. The "too orderly" flag is the same failure from the opposite direction.
The detector isn't scanning for AI, it's scanning for structural cleanliness and treating that as a proxy. Works passably on AI because AI is trained on edited prose. Fails hard on you because edited human prose looks the same to the model.
Did the mod ever say which feature tripped it — paragraph balance, the em dash, something else or just "reads generated," no breakdown?
Exactly the problem. There's no breakdown at all. The filter just says it doesn't pass and leaves it at that. No explanation, no feature it didn't like, nothing to push back on.
My guess is it's the formatting you mentioned — the neat paragraphs, maybe the em dashes — but that's all it is: a guess. The filter never tells you what it flagged. That's the frustrating part. You can't appeal a decision when you don't know what the decision was based on.
The only other option is opening a thread with the human moderators. That takes time, and there's no guarantee it'll change anything.
So for now I'm just sitting here, with a comment that won't publish because a bot decided it looked wrong.
The fact that it won't even name the feature is worse than my case. A wrong verdict you can see the reasoning for is at least falsifiable, something you can actually argue against. A wrong verdict with no reasoning attached isn't a verdict, it's just a wall.
Does the moderator thread actually surface the flag, or does it stay a black box all the way up?
Unfortunately, it stays a black box :(