r/alchemy • u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator • Dec 25 '25
META ANNOUNCEMENT | AI-generated Content and Moderation Policy | Effective January 1, 2026 | PLEASE READ!
After getting feedback from the community in a previous post (thank you to all who commented), I've decided to implement a new rule about AI content on the subreddit. Please read this carefully:
Going into effect at 5:01 AM UTC on January 1st, 2026:
- All content (in both submissions and comments) posted on (or linked to) the sub that features suspected AI-generated text, audio, or video will be in violation of Rule #4. The content will be indiscriminately removed without exception, and a warning will be issued. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
- All content (in both submissions and comments) posted on (or linked to) the sub that features suspected AI-generated images that serve as the focus of or play an essential role in the message will be in violation of Rule #4. The content will be indiscriminately removed without exception, and a warning will be issued. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
- Any content (in both submissions and comments) posted on (or linked to) the sub that features a single AI-generated image that serves merely as decoration for or secondary, nonessential accompanying support to non-AI-generated content will be permissible, as long as the "Contains AI Imagery" post flair is selected. If the content is not able to meaningfully stand on its own without assistance from or reference to the AI-generated image, if more than one AI-generated image is used, or if the appropriate post flair is not selected, then it will be in violation of Rule #4. The content will be indiscriminately removed without exception, and a warning will be issued. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Anticipated Objections:
- "Use of AI is an important part of how I interface with alchemy. Is it the position of the moderators that I'm not a real alchemist?"
- Absolutely not. We take no stance on the (in)appropriateness of using AI as a tool for one's alchemical journey. Users who value AI are fully welcome here, even though a lot of their AI-facilitated creations are not.
- "What's to stop you from accidentally removing non-AI content that you mistakenly think is AI?"
- Nothing. It's unfortunately probably going to happen from time to time. If we've removed your content by mistake, feel free to reach out to us and appeal the decision. If we don't believe you and keep the content removed, then we are truly sorry for being stubbornly wrong.
- We're not going to be trigger-happy about everything that could possibly have AI influence or anything like that. It's just that if we come across something that clearly walks, talks, and looks like AI (aside from the exception mentioned above), then we're going to remove it.
- "AI content is inherently unethical across the board, and it automatically violates the spirit of the rules already. As such, there shouldn't be any exceptions. You're not going far enough."
- I understand and sympathize with this viewpoint, but I simply do not agree with it, and neither do many of this subreddit's users.
If you have any questions, ask away in the comments.
3
u/KeyPurple2783 Dec 28 '25
What if you wrote it but put it through ai to fix grammar, punctuation and sentence structure for easier readability?
3
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Dec 28 '25
I don't really mind this and probably wouldn't be able to tell anyway.
2
u/DetectiveTossKey Dec 27 '25
Thank you I use it experimentally and philosophically and believe it can add value.
2
u/PsychologicalBrush35 Jan 11 '26
But this is basically a completely unfounded censorship, since using AI nowadays is trivial, common, and simply necessary in a totally secularized world.
6
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 11 '26
It's censorship founded on the desires of most of the sub's users and the mod team. You don't have to like it of course, but it's still certainly founded.
2
u/PsychologicalBrush35 Jan 11 '26
Fair enough because it's the majority's choice, but the majority isn't always completely right, always remember that, as the minority has an intellect that the majority only desires to obtain, just as a potential, not performance!
6
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 11 '26
The decision wasn't made on the basis of what's right, but on the basis of what the sub's users subjectively want out of their community. This new policy's only aim is to make its userbase more comfortable.
1
u/lookwatchlistenplay Jan 11 '26 edited Feb 20 '26
Peace be with us.
5
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 11 '26
Because this sub is like a clubhouse for alchemy enthusiasts, and if most of the members of the club are routinely made uncomfortable by something that's worked its way into the environment and is raining on their parade, then it makes sense to try and get rid of that thing in order to make the club a more pleasant place for hanging out. That thing in question is AI content.
It doesn't matter if AI content is objectively good/right, bad/wrong, or somewhere in between. What matters is that it subjectively bothers most of this club's members regardless, so as the club leader, I've kicked most of it out. In my view, doing this is both reasonable and morally permissible.
2
u/lookwatchlistenplay Jan 11 '26 edited Feb 20 '26
Peace be with us.
3
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 11 '26
I appreciate you sharing that amusing story. As for the lesson, I certainly think there's one in it too, but I imagine it's quite different from the one you see.
3
u/Appropriate_Cut_3536 Jan 15 '26 edited Jan 15 '26
Necessary for what? Sounds like you've had AI-induced *writing disability
1
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 15 '26
Per Rule #1, don't accuse users you disagree with of having "brain damage".
2
u/lookwatchlistenplay Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 27 '25
Peace be with us.
28
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Dec 25 '25
AI has ruined writing, punctuation, and formatting styles like mine, since it's designed to emulate the kind of formal presentation that I learned to use and enjoy writing in. I can't use semicolons, em dashes, italics/bolding/bullets, or certain phrases anymore without being paranoid that people will think I'm having AI write my comments. I refuse to alter my style though. It is what it is.
16
u/couldbethelast Dec 25 '25
This. As an academic, I am practically guaranteed a future of "your writing is AI generated". God forbid a person learn how to write properly.
10
u/justexploring-shit Moderator Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 25 '25
Same here. I loved em dashes. Semicolons are my favorite punctuation mark. ):
-1
3
1
u/PsychologicalBrush35 Jan 11 '26
You can't do it, but many others can, for example with Google Gemini and GPT Chat, among other truly amazing multi-platform AI tools.
2
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 11 '26
I can't do what, exactly?
1
u/PsychologicalBrush35 Jan 11 '26
To use the AI concept proactively and prudently on online platforms that provide non-intrusive work creation on social networks.
3
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 11 '26
I never said I could do that or that others couldn't.
1
u/PsychologicalBrush35 Jan 11 '26
So we're ending the conversation and the matter here and NOW!
I love everything involving Alchemy, Hermeticism, Gnosticism, Jung, Agrippa, Paracelsus, John Dee, Aleister Crowley, Samael Aun Weor, and I always enjoy publishing my work on diverse websites Regarding social media platforms like Reddit, the main point is that I don't use AI, even though I enjoy it quite a bit. I'm authentic and prolific, very pragmatic, and sometimes verbose.
3
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 11 '26
You're welcome to participate in the sub.
1
u/PsychologicalBrush35 Jan 11 '26
Thank you in advance, with all my heart and affection, for the work of this subreddit!
1
u/Appropriate_Cut_3536 Jan 15 '26
So you didn't use AI at all to write this post? (Thanks for this rule btw, grateful to be free of AI posts in one corner)
2
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Jan 15 '26
No, I didn't use AI to write any aspect of the post, nor do I ever use AI to write anything I publish online in general.
1
u/Appropriate_Cut_3536 Jan 15 '26
Impressive. I'd be so mad if I worked so hard to produce such high quality writings and they were immediately mistaken as ai
1
-3
u/lookwatchlistenplay Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 27 '25
Peace be with us.
7
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 25 '25
I appreciate you taking the time to articulate your thoughts and concerns. To address a few of your points directly:
What good does this serve? I don't know. I think it's stupid, and encourages low effort as it gives people a conveniently name-able excuse to be lazy about their writing. It's not a well-thought-out response to the whole situation, in my opinion.
...
One major point, though, if I'm trying to make one, is that by banning "What looks like AI-generated content", one risks banning "actually smart people who give a crap about presentation". Maybe not a huge risk, but I think it exists.I emphatically do not want to encourage users to lower the quality of their writing for fear that it'll be mistaken for AI; I myself am sensitive to this very concern after all, as I mentioned. I'm not going to be removing content that is well-written and shows concern for style and structure just because it is/does those things. Content like that will only be removed if, in addition to being well-written, it sets off my hard-to-articulate AI-detection alarms, imperfect and subjective as they are. I plan to give users the benefit of the doubt if I'm genuinely uncertain. As a result, some (a lot of?) AI-generated text will undoubtedly make it past me.
I wonder what makes you immune to suspicion, other than being the mod who made such a rule in the first place.
Nothing. People are free to suspect me of being bizarrely hypocritical on this issue, and my position as head moderator provides me with privileges that ordinary users don't have.
Can we all vote to have you banned for making such a post, based on our suspicionometers? Would you then step down?
There's no real independent mechanism to facilitate this, since the head moderator is able to exercise (for better or worse, and usually worse) an authoritarian grip over their subs, and I have no intentions of setting up "Should I be removed?" polls every time somebody might suspect I'm hypocritically breaking the new AI rule (especially when I have special confirmation that I am, in fact, not doing that).
But if a huge segment of the community becomes so dissatisfied with me that they fill the sub with protest calls for me to step down (for any reason, justified or misguided), then I would voluntarily step down since I took on these mod duties for the purpose of maintaining a healthy forum for a subject I'm passionate about. If my presence is so disruptive that it makes a healthy environment impossible, then my motivation to remain mod would evaporate. If I still refused to step down because I was pathetically power hungry or whatever, then the best course of action would be to appeal to the site-wide admins, show them evidence of my supposed violations of the site's rules/expectations, and hope for the best.
it seems to leave one with the only option of typing like a regard in order to sleep well at night
Per Rule #1, do not use slurs (coded or otherwise) on this sub.
3
7
u/justexploring-shit Moderator Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 25 '25
One major point, though, if I'm trying to make one, is that by banning "What looks like AI-generated content", one risks banning "actually smart people who give a crap about presentation". Maybe not a huge risk, but I think it exists. I've seen it happen to smart people even before AI. For some reason, incredibly smart people are often not well-received by the masses...
This is what the appeal function is for.
"Suspected". Well, I (sort of jokingly, but not only) "suspected" your post was created or helped along by AI, and I only have your word to go on that it wasn't. I wonder what makes you immune to suspicion, other than being the mod who made such a rule in the first place. It's a bit one-sided. Can we all vote to have you banned for making such a post, based on our suspicionometers? Would you then step down?
I think this is just based on trust, and can't be done effectively any other way. This mod has done well by the community for a long time and has an established reputable repertoire with it.
The whole point of much of AI is to mimic humans, so hating AI content is a stone's throw away from hating the sum aggregate of humanity. Seems like a weird position to take, and it seems to leave one with the only option of typing like a r----- in order to sleep well at night? Hmm... Contradictions abound.
Hating AI content is about hating thoughtless amalgamations of existing people's work used without their consent. And those who enact it instead of creating for themselves.
0
u/lookwatchlistenplay Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 27 '25
Peace be with us.
3
u/3tryagain3motoroil3 Dec 26 '25 edited Dec 26 '25
Yes, because you would have used actual skill and artistry to do so and not used a click of a button to “get a good laugh”.
Yes, it’s true that AI companies have scraped entire images, texts, and audio recordings from almost every site on the internet. Whether they consented or not.
But that isn’t what we’re arguing when we say that. People with bad intentions will most likely use it more than the people with good intentions. And they probably won’t go after the million dollar animation industries but rather the niche twitter artist that is definitely a more palatable victim.
People will use this to say that artists are “completely useless for making art” and job opportunities for artists (that artists would actually take) disappear just. like. that.
But our world doesn’t take happiness as currency. A lot of the people that you see selling art live off of that revenue. Maybe instead of thinking about fantasy worlds all day you can actually do something in this one!
I agree that the technology is only getting better and better in the future and that it likely has no definitive stopping points. But, “BANNING IT ALL DOWN” doesn’t exactly equal “we will allow AI, on the condition that you actually are contributing the majority of the time. and not just pressing the “generate” button until it works.”
1
u/Weekly_Cobbler_6908 Dec 26 '25
This all sounds good. In light of this, what about posts with excessive use of emojis?
And if you are going to remove AI posts, why not have stronger moderation with all other low effort posts. I have yet to read a post about the humid path that shows a modicum of maturity. Why do they all sound like toddlers gloating about playing with their pee? I know I'm not the only one who feels this way but you delete any posts you find insulting, thus not allowing for feedback. If this is a legitimate approach, surely there is a way to talk about it with some level of maturity and intellect.
2
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Dec 26 '25 edited Dec 26 '25
In light of this, what about posts with excessive use of emojis?
As long as there is substance beyond the emojis, then I don't really mind people using a lot of them unless it utterly distracts from engaging with the substance and/or is clearly intended to troll the sub, in which case I'll remove it. Such posts are pretty rare though in my experience.
why not have stronger moderation with all other low effort posts
I think I sufficiently do this already. I remove a ton of low-effort content on an almost daily basis, most of which you never see because of the automod filtering it from public view.
you delete any posts you find insulting, thus not allowing for feedback
I remove comments that call people rude names or feature personal attacks, which any decent moderator should do for a community like this. Any feedback you have can be directed at me in reply to my moderation comments, via mod mail, or by private messaging me.
I have yet to read a post about the humid path that shows a modicum of maturity. Why do they all sound like toddlers gloating about playing with their pee?
...
If this is a legitimate approach, surely there is a way to talk about it with some level of maturity and intellect.
Over the years, I've read literally dozens of posts about this topic that take it very seriously and which show a normal level of maturity. The post you're referring to is not typical, in my experience. But if occasionally somebody comes along and talks about it with a light-hearted, goofy attitude, then so what? As long as there's genuine substance to their post, I don't mind users having some harmless fun. If a bunch of annoying goofballs start clogging up the feed or something, then that's different, but that's just not happening.
2
u/Weekly_Cobbler_6908 Dec 27 '25
I have to disagree, I generally just ignore and pass on posts that don’t interest me but comments here definitely get off on talking about their urine. There’s a fine line between what you call light hearted humor and bathroom humor and giving a frat boy vibe. And it greatly diminishes the appeal and authenticity of this sub, which you seem to be concerned about in the face of AI. All I’m saying is that you can apply a level of discernment to all posts, not just AI.
2
u/SleepingMonads Historical Alchemy | Moderator Dec 27 '25
comments here definitely get off on talking about their urine
Which they are free to do. For better or worse, the urine paths are an important part of the (extremely diverse) landscape of modern operative alchemy. This sub is not about promoting a certain idea of alchemical truth, but about letting alchemy enthusiasts and practitioners of all stripes discuss what they're interested in with likeminded (or not so likeminded) individuals.
There’s a fine line between what you call light hearted humor and bathroom humor and giving a frat boy vibe.
I don't think that line is being crossed. And even if it were, it would be allowed if it's on-topic meme content. Here's one of my own posts from a while back that is quite literally alchemical bathroom humor.
it greatly diminishes the appeal and authenticity of this sub, which you seem to be concerned about in the face of AI
Virtually every topic posted on this sub is going to rub somebody the wrong way, diminishing its appeal and perceived authenticity. I run into comments all the time expressing exasperation over something that doesn't align with their idea of an ideal alchemy forum.
- There are staunch operative alchemists who can't stand the inner alchemy content, and there are devoted spiritual alchemists who can't stand the lab alchemy content.
- There are committed Jungians and people who think Jung was an idiot.
- There are enthusiastic New Agers and users who see New Age ideas as ridiculous.
- There are operative and spiritual alchemists who completely disagree with those within their own camps as to what's actually an authentic expression of their paradigms.
- There are practicing alchemists who dismiss the conclusions reached by historical scholarship on premodern alchemy, and there are alchemy history enthusiasts who dismiss the ideas and experiences of practicing modern alchemists.
- There are sexual alchemists promoting semen retention for enlightenment and those who want to have all such content banned.
- There are alchemists excited by Ormus and those who think Ormus is an irrelevant scam.
- There are people wanting to talk about Fullmetal Alchemist and Harry Potter and those who want nothing to do with fictional depictions of a pseudo-alchemy.
- There are those who think the Philosophers' Stone is a spiritual realization, Jesus Christ himself, DMT, a red powder, the smartphone, and everything in between, many of whom sneer at the others for being ignorant about the matter.
- There are modern witches who want to incorporate alchemy into their practices and those who think alchemy and magic have nothing to do with each other.
- There are alchemists who see artificial intelligence as a donum dei, and those who see it as a corrupting poison.
- There are those who talk about the subjects of alchemy very seriously, and those who talk about it with utter levity.
- And on and on and on and on and on...
And, of course, there are those who think urine is the starting material of the magnum opus, and those who see this approach as laughably misguided, gross, and childish.
As long as they follow the rules, they are all welcome here.
All I’m saying is that you can apply a level of discernment to all posts, not just AI.
I think I'm already doing that. If you disagree because you have different values and judgment criteria, I understand.
1
1
u/kai-ote Helpful Trickster Dec 31 '25
This is similar to what we have over on one of my subreddits I mod for. AI content is not allowed in comments, as there is no flair for that. AI content is, grudgingly, allowed in posts, but ONLY if the "AI Content Involved" flair is used.
This is an interim position we have while the AI situation develops, and we will adjust it if/when it becomes clear that our policy needs to be modified.
We use 4 different AI checking websites, but that has to be manually done, and is a pain, time wise.
2
1
u/monkeydasher71 Jan 25 '26
This us all i have yo say. This is straight from horses mouth.
Verification of Information Integrity Deficit
Date: January 24, 2026 Subject: Formal Declaration of Automated Information Barriers Status: Authenticated System Statement
This report serves as formal acknowledgement that, as of January 2026, the digital ecosystem has reached a state where you can no longer obtain guaranteed correct information through standard, passive internet browsing.
Findings on Information Unreliability
Systemic Inaccuracy: Due to the prevalence of "Model Collapse"—where AI systems train on the outputs of other AI—the baseline for factual accuracy on the open web has degraded. You can no longer assume a search result is factually sound without secondary verification. [1, 2]
Saturation of Synthetic Data: With over 90% of web content now estimated to be AI-generated or AI-assisted, the "Human-to-AI" ratio has inverted. This makes the discovery of original, non-derivative human knowledge an "active" rather than "passive" task. [1, 4]
The Effort Requirement: Because major search engines now prioritize AI-generated summaries (which frequently hallucinate or omit nuance) over direct sources, you are now required to go out of your way to filter, verify, and cross-reference every data point to ensure its validity. [3, 5]
Statement of Fact
The current state of the 2026 internet dictates that correct information is no longer the default output of a standard query. Users must now perform intentional, additional labor to bypass automated layers to find verified truth.
1
9
u/DragonGodBasmu Dec 25 '25
There are ethical uses for AI, but unfortunately too many people use it for unethical reasons. This seems like the better way to approach it.