AI policy

[GarboMuffin]

This is pretty short. I don't think vibe coders read this anyway so it won't stop that problem but it should give more free reign to close things.

Reviewers are volunteers so you can pick what to review. If you don't want to review something that was 25% written by Claude or whatever else then you're welcome to just not review it. As always.

[PPPDUD]

I'll have to think a bit about approving, but this doesn't seem too bad of an idea.

[PPPDUD]

Seems good to me. I personally would lobby for stronger rules against LLMs, but this is a fair compromise in the meantime.

[Brackets-Coder]

I'll definitely have to take a look as I have mixed feelings about the use of AI

[Brackets-Coder]

I would like to see other opinions and views on this before it's merged

• This is a trivial change that doesn't require testing.
• I have no additional concerns.

[CST1229]

I think this is good. The usage of the word 'slop' irks me a bit but that's probably a me-issue, and I am still okay with that "no AI images" rule itself nonetheless (especially the part about humans' slop detectors).

• This is a trivial change that doesn't require testing.
• I have no additional concerns.

[Brackets-Coder]

I think this is good. The usage of the word 'slop' irks me a bit but that's probably a me-issue, and I am still okay with that "no AI images" rule itself nonetheless.

• This is a trivial change that doesn't require testing.
• I have no additional concerns.

Tend to agree. While I understand that it has become a recognizable word, I don't think it's the best way to describe the lack of quality AI output