My work gets dismissed as AI slop. Here are the receipts.
People have started telling me that my writing sounds like AI. I published that sentence in a LinkedIn post recently because it kept being true, and the fuller version is this: hours of verified work, read for about ten seconds, filed under slop, with nothing in it checked. It stung, and I wrote the sting down as data, which at least settled the question of whether I still have feelings. Here is…
My work has been dismissed as AI-generated, but I have receipts to prove otherwise. Hours of verified work, read for just ten seconds, were labeled as slop and dismissed without any checks. This personal experience is unusual because the accusation is half true. I do use AI constantly, and I have a documented ghostwriter in my basement who is fully disclosed.
However, the dismissal misses the mark. The issue lies in the judgment, which focuses on style rather than substance. The tell of slop is that nothing in it can be checked, while style is unreliable evidence in both directions. My writing style is based on executive prose, which aims to wrap KPIs in narrative polish without sounding unqualified.
When my de-AI guardrails caught my unassisted sentences, it flagged me as machine-generated. The important thing is whether the work is true, not whether it sounds like AI. I have built a system with checkable receipts, including live URLs, revenue ledgers, and end-to-end Playwright suites. This transparency separates work from slop and proves the authenticity of my writing.
Written by urgent.news from Dev.to's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
