It occurs to me that if you're already getting upset over "every %&$# AI article sounding like the %^#@" then either:

1. You're reading too many unoriginal articles in too much depth

or

2. Not content to accept that you can stop reading at any time

or

7. insufficiently willing to critique your selection criteria for choosing a particular article.

or

11. something I didn't mention in this list of several things it could have been.

I have a few suggestions (one of which is that you consider what I'm saying here not just in the spirit of sincerity but also in the spirit you would if you thought I were deliberately trying to pi$$ you off: which seems to resonate more? Which is more supportable in terms of conventional logic? Which reflects what might be said to be the inarguable truth of the situation? etc.)

We definitely *do* face a deluge of AI-generated text samples. What we glean from them is up to us.

My strategy is to measure articles progressively as follows:

1. less from the perspective of "ok, this article 'says it will take me X minutes to read, I had better get my 10 minutes' worth of value out of it" and more

2. from the perspective of "what can this article do to further direct me to the track of what I am looking for."

I regard it as of tantamount importance not just that an article grab me, but that I grab it.

I won't read something unless I am willing to invest at least 100 words in due reply; I believe this will eventually come to be the normal approach and I think it will be an automatic forcing function to cause writers--true writers like you and I (though, I do usually have an issue with you and I, me and him, she and they, etc.)--to rise ever so easily to the top of the crop of people who do it that way...which means....

Well, it means that the reading purists will be able to huddle together with the writing purists and able down the road of "genuine" creativity without overly using AI as a crutch.

Perhaps this is similar to a guy who cuts his finger and winds up in the ER with the option of superglue (newer approach) or stitches (ages old) or that new molecular mesh-fused to skin approach (newest).

My $0.02.

Oh yes, and one more thing...it helps both you and your reader (I think it does, anyway) to begin your articles with a less conventional introduction and more of a personal handshake.

If you'd like to see my latest example (which is to say the one I think I've made the best pass of) please find it under

When first I knocked...

Also...I think we'll be using that "Date written" stamp a whole lot more regularly and the "read length" stamp a whole lot loosely in the near future.

Thanks for pushing me closer to the truth, Jano. I sincerely appreciate the effort.