Why do you keep saying "unwritten rule" so often? It seems quite obvious that if you haven't used your brain to generate content then maybe it shouldn't be rewarded. It's not really something uncommon or far-fetched to expect that to be the case. Your post seems to indicate as if you're shocked and surprised that that is the case, that a community of people from all over the world would be against someone suddenly starting to shit out a post per day using AI and less effort in geekgirl's case while increasing reward generation by many folds.
Is it really that surprising to you that curation should work this way? You're one of the most rewarded authors on hive with a reputation number that places you in rank #21 of all accounts and this is somehow an "unwritten rule" to you?
Let's take a look at your post again so people don't think I'm just overly aggro or trigger happy to downvote people as if it's a fun activity to do and benefits me in any way.
A big user on Hive has currently admitted to using AI to create their contents and unfortunately we know what follows after such a confession.
Why the fuck is this an unfortunate action? That we can protect our reward pool for low effort farms is unfortunate to you? How are things looking on steemit's and blurt's trending lately?
wow such amazing engagement of the trending posts of the same authors there daily, what a beautiful proof of brain project, definitely one of a kind
The user could have instantly agreed to create more original content and that was it. However, it devolved into an endless debate over who is wrong or right.
The two parties are not wrong or right
Or they could just openly separate text in the post to make it clear what is AI generated and what isn't and not be negative about receiving some downvotes if majority of the post is AI generated if they happen to be an author that receives a lot of autovotes (like myself and yourself) since they openly admit a lot of the content of the post was created with low effort - low effort such as having AI generate a lot of the content of the post and you just reading through it to make sure it's "true", etc. That's still low effort content and should be stated as such. It's not "who's right and who's wrong", it's about who's transparent and upfront about it and who's trying to keep it hidden and deceive curators that you're putting in more effort than you what they really are - that's what AI does, it helps you create things faster and at your convenience, it's not something that's up for debate if it's "wrong or right" if such content should be similarly rewarded as non-AI generated content.
there is another invisible sense of rightness that comes with being a Hive investor: the idea of being free to do whatever you want.
They are free to do what they want, they can continue to post AI generated content as much as they want, no one can stop them. You're mixing investor and author here for unknown reasons, while you're free to do what you want, you're not free to receive rewards however you want. You're free to counter the downvotes if you feel AI generated content should be rewarded depending on who's posting and you're probably free to retaliate on anyone who disagrees with you.
I agree with the rest of the content on your post, just the beginning part kind of irked me the wrong way coming from a top hive author. It really shouldn't be that confusing at this point in time that if you suddenly started using AI to generate posts and get caught that you'll most likely face some downvotes if you're generally earning a lot of rewards but also if you're new and earning less rewards - same fate should face you.
There's many days I miss posting knowing I may miss out on a lot of autovotes - even if I forfeit many of them to projects, hive.fund, null, etc. I still don't post if I'm busy with other things. Could I just tell chatgpt to write 1000 words about a random subject I'm usually interested in and post that? Yes. Do I do it? No, cause I'm not a dumbass wanting to risk their reputation getting fucked beyond repair like some do and then on top of it try and justify and defend their actions. Just don't post if you don't have the time, others putting in effort will get your rewards although they're not going to notice much increase due to the size of active authors here daily.
PS. Your title is a bit weirdly formed, the "so" doesn't really fit in and it stands out as bad grammar.
RE: Instead of Using AI for contenting, why not do this?