want to make sure I'm understanding the actual issue.
Is the core concern that the RFD involved material AI contribution that wasn't disclosed?
If so, I'd rather engage with that directly than go in circles about policy interpretation.
I'm formally contesting this moderation action and requesting it be reviewed.
The stated reason for removal is that the vote was "very clearly written by AI." I'd like to point out that the Voting Policy linked in the report (info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy) contains no provision prohibiting the use of AI tools in drafting or formulating a vote. The policy sets standards for what a vote must contain — a sufficient RFD, reference to specific arguments, avoidance of bias, etc. — but it does not regulate the tools a voter uses to produce that RFD, nor does it list "AI-assisted writing" as grounds for removal.
If my RFD fails to meet a specific, enumerated voting standard, I'd ask that the mod action cite that standard directly and explain which part of the RFD falls short. "Reads like AI" is not a policy violation — it's a stylistic impression, and removing votes on that basis sets a precedent that isn't supported by the rules as currently written.
A few specific questions:
1. Which enumerated section of the Voting Policy does my vote violate?
2. What is the standard of evidence being applied to classify a vote as AI-generated, and is that standard documented anywhere?
3. If AI-assisted voting is considered impermissible, where is that stated in the policy that voters are held to?
If the site's position is that AI-assisted votes are disallowed, that needs to be written into the policy before it can be enforced against voters. Until then, I'd ask that the vote be reinstated or that a policy-grounded reason for removal be provided.
Thanks.
