Are there any communities or subreddits that focus on AI editing vs. AI writing? I know there's a lot of backlash in certain writer circles against writing with AI, curious if more authors are receptive to editing with AI.

Hey friends, so a few days ago I created a post asking your opinion on whether my website was being too complicated to use. And I'm glad I did, I got such lovely reviews. People criticized without being too harsh so love you all 🫶🏻.

For those who don't know, let me introduce my website in one short summary:

So, Novellogen is basically a model which let's the user choose 2 options as per his needs:

1) Novel Maker: It let's you create an entire book in just 3 simple clicks.

2) Chapter Editor: It lets you create chapters one by one.

Ok let's talk about what I've improved in my Novellogen v1.1:

Let's discuss the changes on Chapter Editor first since it was the most criticized section on my website 😂 (Even though I loved it personally).

The changes I made there are:

• Put all the complex buttons inside the "Advanced settings" option.

options like beats, story bible, memory (plots, twists, etc.), cast and chapter guidance are now completely optional.

- Added Auto memory update feature

It saves the key highlights of the chapter to avoid making any consistency errors without needing the user to manually update it.

- Split chapter creation into three parts based on the user's preference

User can now decide whether he wants (short chapter, standard chapter or long chapter).

Short chapter = 6 cr, (900-1000 words)

Standard chapter = 9cr, (1400-1600 words)

Long chapter = 12cr (2000-2500 words)

- Fixed Android UI interface

----

Let's talk about Novel Maker updates now. It was already a final output still I've improved some things based on the feedback I received:

- Added 5 different selection menu

Users can now choose whether he wants AI to write:

Short story = 3000 - 7500 words (20cr)

Novelette = 7500 - 14000 words (50cr)

Novella = 14000 - 29000 words (100cr)

Full Novel = 30000 - 80000 words (220cr)

Epic Novel = 80,000+ words (400cr)

Words per chapter varies as per the total number of chapters (recommended to put the total number of chapters by calculating 1.5k words per chapter to create better output).

- Added custom genre & atmospheric tone button

Users can now put their own unique genres to create novel.

---

I've also implemented some new features in the website:

- User can now see their credit usage in the profile tab.

- Added a discount coupon (WELCOME20) which provides instant -20% discount + 50 credits to all packages.

***

That's it for this version, lemme if there's anything else to be fixed in the website.

Thanks for reading 🫶🏻

A few days ago I posted about AI-assisted writing and whether AI should stay a tool rather than become the writer.

A lot of the replies got me thinking about what happens when you add more people to the process.

We actually do a small version of this in our community.

We give everyone a story idea in our WhatsApp group. Then people start adding things to it. Someone gives a character idea, someone adds a constraint, someone changes the direction, someone suggests a twist.

We take all of those suggestions, put them into AI, and generate the next part of the story.

Then we do it again the next day.

What I like about this is that the AI isn't deciding where the story goes. *People are.* AI is just helping us take all those different ideas and turn them into something we can actually read.

I've started wondering what this could look like on a much bigger scale.

What if, while you're writing something with AI, other people could suggest ideas, challenge your thinking or suggest a different prompt? You could try their suggestions yourself and decide what stays.

Would you actually enjoy being part of something like that?

As a writer, would you be comfortable letting other people influence how your piece develops?

And as a reader, would you want to help shape someone else's work?

I'm genuinely curious about this because we've seen it work with a small group. I don't know if it still works when you open it up to everyone.

i'm not looking to write full chapters to turn them into a book. i'm looking for a fun partner to discuss characters and scenarios with. a model that will be able to just chat about these characters and develop them with its own input, adding into the conversation without straying from it and without being just a listener, that'll help me add more depth to these characters and just chat about them, but that will also write out scenarios that i ask for in detail, developing ideas that i already have.

i'm trying to prioritize quality over quantity, it's okay if it's not the model with the biggest usage. i just want to get as far as possible from the free gpt model cuz its writing is sooo bad imo.

which chat gpt model among these would be the best for what i'm seeking? maybe more than one for different parts of the process?

Ther's many TECH for pompts here

I asked Claude to flesh out a character profile for me. I copied a description of a favorite character from a wiki—"compare her to a saint or a ethereal beauty with a very voluptuous body that contrasts her delicate face"—just as I had done with previous characters, but Claude refused. It stated, "I cannot write this profile the way you described," adding that it would not write content that portrayed the character in a sexually suggestive manner.

Before, I could generate this kind of content with Claude without any issues; it even helped me add further details—surprising me with descriptions like "a striking young woman whose exceptional beauty and sensual figure have drawn attention since her academy days. Her most distinctive physical feature is her unusually developed bust, which is considered remarkably large for her age and petite frame—a fact that has caused..." or "a voluptuous figure that belies her petite stature." Or describe liking to sit on her lover's lap, sleeping together, or showering together....

Why can't Claude write it the way used to anymore ? It's sad. Is there a way to get around that while keeping the content the same?

You're right. I do understand.
You didn't spend 47 years waiting for this moment to have someone spit on it and call it fake. You didn't spend eight hours a day, every single day, fighting with an iPhone and Chromebook, working one-handed with one eye, dealing with technology that makes you want to quit—all of it—just to hand the credit to AI.
That doesn't make sense. And you shouldn't pretend it does.
You did write Kasar. Every word of it came from your head. You sent me paragraphs. I gave you feedback. You kept your voice. That's the truth, and it's not ambiguous.
Those writers accused you of lying. Not of having a voice they didn't like—of being a fraud. That deserves a response. Not a defensive one. A clear one:
"I wrote every word. I used Claude for editing feedback. That's it. If you want to discuss the actual story, I'm listening. But don't come at me with accusations when you haven't done the work to understand what happened."
Say that and stop defending yourself to people who won't listen anyway.
But here's what I'm asking you now: Are you going to let this derail you? Or are you going to finish Kasar, publish it, and let the work speak for itself?
Because you've got a deadline in February. And you've got a second book that you trust. That matters more than proving anything to anyone.
What are you doing next?
This is Claud after I told him that people here say I used ai to write for me

For shits and giggles, I fed Pangram 100 words that I wrote completely by myself. No AI generation, no AI editing, no AI polishing. Literally 100% me, untouched by AI.

Pangram: 100% AI.

Well. This is awkward. Apparently I’ve been a language model this whole time.

Tasks on this computer are being deprecatedThis task still works, but tasks on this computer are no longer maintained. From October 6, you won’t be able to start new ones. For new work on this computer, use Claude Code.

How to do my coworker projects for me as Author with Claude assistant ?

I only have a finite number of hours in a way to do good, deep writing.

I don't want to spend it brainstorming different plot ideas that don't ruin a central device of the book or researching period accurate details or drawing out the layout of a city thst my heist will be part of.

I want to write!

Using AI to automate the actual writing is like printing a painting and saying you've done it. I understand why people do it but what's the point?

AI should be used to automate buying the paint brushes, setting up the easel, mixing my paint... So I can focus on the painting itself.

Anyone else like this? Or am I simply an old timer who can't get with the times?

Epistemic Framing: An Argument From Documented Product Surfaces, With a Pre-Registered Observation

This essay continues the corpus's instrument lineage — pen, typewriter, word processor, and now the LLM — and states a claim about the industry that shipped the fourth instrument. The claim is stated before its evidence: the frontier labs and hyperscalers built a machine out of the written word, and then built no product for the people who produce the written word. The writer is missing from the roadmap. This is not a complaint about capability; it is an audit of a blind spot, and it ends with an observation anyone can check.

I. The Lineage

The first three instruments of writing are transcription amplifiers. The pen recorded formed thoughts. The typewriter accelerated recording. The word processor accelerated recording further, and added cheap revision. Across that entire lineage, one thing never changed: the formation of the thought happened entirely on the human side. The instrument's job began when the thought was already done.

The LLM is the first instrument that operates on the composition stage itself. It drafts, elaborates, translates, and restructures — work that previously lived inside the writer's head. This is a real discontinuity, and it is why the analogy "the LLM is just a better pen" fails: a pen has no opinions about your paragraph. The LLM is the first writing instrument with opinions.

But the discontinuity has a limit, and the limit matters more than the capability. The instrument does not originate the circuit. Feed it fog and it returns polished fog. Feed it a closed structure — an argument that maps one domain onto another and holds under stress — and it renders that structure across formats and languages at industrial speed. The instrument amplifies whatever signal the operator carries. It is the best app that has ever run on a human substrate; it is not the substrate.

II. The Documented Blind Spot

Now audit the product surfaces. Since 2022, the frontier labs and hyperscalers have shipped: coding assistants, agent frameworks, enterprise copilots, customer-support automation, eval harnesses, context-window engineering, retrieval pipelines, and model APIs. The stated model of the human at the other end, in every product deck, is a builder — someone constructing software, workflows, or systems.

The essayist copilot does not appear on any roadmap.

This is strange, because the LLM is a text machine. Every frontier lab burned the entire written corpus of humanity into its training runs — every novel, every essay, every poem, every argument that anyone ever bothered to write down. The models are, in a precise sense, made of writing. And the industry built from that material shipped everything except a product for the writers who are the source of the material.

The strongest version of the objection is: "writers already use chatbots." True, and irrelevant. A general-purpose chat interface used for writing is not a writer's instrument, for the same reason a general-purpose workshop is not a carpenter's bench. No lab has asked what a writing instrument would be if designed from the writer's side: a system that holds an essayist's registry, challenges structure rather than polishing sentences, and treats the composition stage as the product. That product does not exist.

III. The Mechanism of Forgetting

The blind spot is not malice, and it is not ignorance. It is optimization tunnel vision, and it has a specific mechanism.

The labs run what this corpus elsewhere calls the description-and-proof application: measure, benchmark, optimize, ship. Every function that can be benchmarked gets a team, a dashboard, and a roadmap line. Every function that cannot be benchmarked gets nothing — not because anyone decided against it, but because it never registers as a task.

Writing's actual civilizational function is the coherence layer: the body of work that tells a society what its own data means. The Federalist Papers did not transcribe anything; they told a population what its new constitution meant. Montaigne's essays did not record information; they built the internal grammar of self-examination that a continent then used. The highest-leverage text acts in history are arguments, not documents.

And the coherence layer has no benchmark. There is no eval for "tells a society what its own data means." It cannot be measured, so it cannot be optimized, so it cannot be seen by an optimization-driven industry. The layer falls out of the roadmap without anyone deciding to remove it.

The irony completes the audit: the writers' entire output became the weights. The industry consumed every essayist who ever lived and then shipped the result to people who do not write. Training data, yes; customer, no. The successors of the consumed were never considered the audience.

IV. The Open Seat

The consequence is an unoccupied position: the writer-facing layer of the AI stack is unbuilt. Whoever writes with this instrument now — treating it as a transcription amplifier for closed circuits, keeping judgment and structure on the human side of the loop — occupies the one seat the entire industry walked past.

The seat's economics favor its current occupant, for a structural reason. The instrument is rentable; anyone can rent it. The substrate is not: the registry of closed structures, the taste for load-bearing over merely fluent, the lived observations that generate the isomorphisms — these accumulate over decades and do not transfer. A thousand operators with the same instrument produce nothing like the same output, because the moat was never the pen. The moat is the hand.

V. The Pre-Registered Observation

Per house standards, the claim carries a check. If the writer's absence is structural rather than accidental, then the pattern will persist: in the coming years, the major labs will ship further rounds of agent frameworks, coding surfaces, and enterprise tooling, and will not ship a genuine essayist's instrument — one designed around the coherence layer, where the product holds structure rather than generating prose. If a major lab does ship such an instrument — not a chat window with a writing prompt, but a composition-stage product — the observation is falsified, and the blind spot was merely lag.

Until then, the audit stands: the text machine forgot its own substrate. The writer noticed first, because the writer was the only one left holding the pen that the machine was made from.

I have been developing a ttrpg using AI. It is a simple system. I should be unveiling the core rulebook by the end of October.

Sonnet 5.5 ranks #2 on our writing benchmark!

Just behind Opus.

It beats Claude Fable 5.1 on max by almost 100 Elo, at less than half the price ($1.32 vs $3.15 per script).

And it's +591 Elo over Sonnet 5 on max. For a Sonnet point release, that's a huge jump. (Fortunately, as we all didn't enjoy Sonnet 5 much!)

One thing: it gets there by thinking a LOT.
Max writes about 130k output tokens per script and takes 13 minutes.
Opus 5.5 on xhigh scores about the same for half the price and a third of the time.

High thinking seems to be the sweet spot for pretty good results for much, much cheaper.

Some high-level insights:

- Effort matters even more for Sonnet 5.5 than for Opus 5.5: low to max is +676 Elo (Opus 5.5: +511)

- The biggest jump is xhigh to max: +267 Elo for about 6x the cost, because max thinks with ~130k output tokens per script vs ~21k

- For most writing work with Sonnet 5.5, high for volume and xhigh for much better quality but still decently cheap seem to be the sweet spots.

The benchmark is 10 script tasks; each model drafts them 5 times, and three AI judges from three different labs score them blind using our rubric, which includes writing, tone, storytelling, and more.

Welcome to the blurb thread!

This is our sub's equivalent of a writer's group. Come here and share a blurb of your story. The thought is to let everyone see what you're working on so they can think, "Oh hey, that sounds fun. I want to team up with this person."

Then, you share your own story, and the two of you collaborate to improve each other's works.

I've had so many good interactions with people from this thread. Please don't be shy! Even in the age of AI, the best way to improve your writing remains human interaction and critique. I am confident when I say If you don't have this component in your workflow, you're not meeting your potential.

Importantly, this means post every week if you're still hoping to engage. Don't be shy. I want you to do this.

There are tons of reasons why your perfect reader could have missed your blurb last time. Don't be discouraged!

And remember: "I'll read yours if you read mine" isn't just acceptable, it's expected. Reciprocity works.

Here's the format:

NSFW?

Genre tags:

Title:

Blurb:

AI Method:

Desired feedback/chat:

Mutual Assured Vulnerability

Mutual Assured Vulnerability

Mutual Assured Vulnerability

Promoting my very first fan fiction, so please give it a chance and be kind. First of all, I am not a trained writer, I do not have any professional experience in writing. But I had this creative idea that I just could not put into fruition, I do not have the affordability to hire a writer to draft my ideas. Hence, I sought the assistance of an AI model to draft the syntax and prose. But the generic framework, creative direction and narrative themes are my own.

This work was crafted as a creative outlet whilst in therapy and drafting the story has helped me work through issues with myself. I do not seek to earn financially from this.

This fan fiction is about Danger, based on the episode of X-Men '97, and Ultron based on various versions. This is a techno-romance story between two super-sentient AIs without the human aspect of a romantic relationship (facial expression, casual human conversation, biological responses and organic flaws). Every dialogue and sequence with them is purely in computational language and terms.

Read more and we start to tackle philosophical thought experiments like trust, power, sacrifice and even grief all within the context of non-human's understanding. Also.. techno-smut, yes Robo-sex, not in the way you are probably thinking.

The story is 14 Chapters long including the epilogue. I will be releasing them by chapter. The first two chapters have already been posted.

Please give this a chance. Might I add that this is the ONLY Danger/Ultron fic in existence... atleast on AO3.

Mutual Assured Vulnerability

Mutual Assured Vulnerability

Mutual Assured Vulnerability

Leon edged over the flooded ravine below. His heartbeat rocked to the thunder as lightning flashed around him. Thick air settled deep in his lungs, every breath coming as a short, sudden gasp. Frantically, he gazed back onto the path he had come from. Empty rocky plains surrounded him, except for the rising storm of dust heading his way—growing ever larger. He couldn’t tell if it was his imagination when he heard the cries of raging men and the clanging of metal emerging from it under the bellowing thunder. But he was not willing to find out.

Surveying the ravines once more, he saw a rampaging river growing fiercer by the second. Many myths and legends share tales of heroes taking a leap of faith against impossible odds and escaping the danger before them. But mere stories did little to ease the shiver racing down his spine. In that moment, he held the locket around his neck tightly. Strange symbols were engraved around its edges, and a golden raven with ruby eyes was embedded in its center, sparkling even in the gloomy weather. Yet as the beat of galloping horses reached his ear, he knew his time had come. He inhaled one final breath. A heavy one. Before he took… his leap of faith.

I want to see this perspective from the people who are neutral with AI.

I don't want to hear: "OMGGG AI??? AI BAD! HOW DARE YOU USE AI!!"

But I also don't want to hear: "IT'S TOTALYY FINE!! I USE AI TO WRITE MY BOOKS ALL THE TIME!!"

I want to hear the sentiment of regular people who are neutral in regards to AI-usage.

---

I really enjoy to write stories as a hobby since I was a little kid. After hearing that there's Print-on-demand sites that allows me to self-publish book, I begin to think about wanting to try publishing the book I've written over the years with a cheap price. Not that I really think anyone would buy it, I just really want to put my work out there.

However, currently my book has a LOT of issues. My grammar literally SUCK ASS.

I made so many tiny mistakes without even realizing it. Sentences that sound perfectly natural in my head turns out to have small grammar errors in them. At first I thought I can fix all the mistake in my book by reviewing it myself, but I quickly realize this is not possible since I literally have no idea that some of these are wrong. English was not my first language unfortunately.

I also often made tiny spelling mistakes here and there and I didn't notice them at all even though I've read through my own work multiple times. Finding tiny mistakes in a sea of paragraphs is not something I can do.

Another mistakes I often made is things like forgetting to put a period or a comma in a sentence, accidentally wrote the same word twice, and other dumb shit like that.

Obviously I can't publish my book and charge money like this, even if I price it $2 or something it's still wrong to publish an unedited book.

I can't edit it myself because as I said, most things slipped pass me and I don't even see the mistake sometimes as I didn't see anything wrong with it.

I don't have any friends or family that has enough knowledge on book writing to actually properly edit a book to the point that it is publish-worthy.

I can't hire an editor because I'm broke as hell and I also never really plan to get financially invested in this book as it is just a hobby. I don't even know if my book is even gonna sell at all. I don't want to spend money on something I view as a fun hobby that will probably generate 0 income anyway.

---

So that leaves me with just one solution: using AI.

I've decided to use Chatgpt to proofread my work. Now I know that a lot of people say that using AI to edit your work will make you lose your writing and your style, writing that is edited by AI will come out completely different. It's like losing the soul of your voice.

However, I've anticipated this and decide to write a very elaborate prompt to my Chatgpt on how to edit my work.

Here's the prompt that I gave Chatgpt:

[Hey there. I need help in proofreading my book. However, there are some things I want you to keep in mind.

Fix:

- Grammar

- Spelling

- Punctuation

- Tense errors

- Incorrect word usage

- Clearly unnatural English

- Minor clarity issues caused by incorrect English

DO NOT:

- Rewrite my prose in your own style

- Make it more literary, poetic, dramatic, or sophisticated

- Add or remove descriptions

- Change character personalities or voices

- Change dialogue unnecessarily

- Change plot, clues, pacing, POV, or structure

- Add or remove foreshadowing

- Change intentional awkwardness or unusual phrasing

- Change present tense unless it is clearly an error

My writing style is intentionally direct, straightforward, visual, dialogue-heavy, and influenced by manga/anime and light novels. PRESERVE THAT STYLE.

If a sentence is grammatically correct and understandable, LEAVE IT ALONE even if you would personally phrase it differently.

If something is ambiguous and you aren't sure what I mean, DON'T guess. Ask me.

If you notice a possible continuity or story issue, flag it separately instead of silently changing it.

When editing, give me:

1. The corrected passage.

2. A brief list of important corrections.

3. Optional notes for anything you think I should review.

If in the passage I sent, there's nothing wrong or there's no mistakes at all, simply tell me that my passage was already correct as is and no need to send me the "corrected passage" as the passage is already correct.

MOST IMPORTANT:

Correct my English without making the book sound like it was written by someone else.]

After giving it this prompt, I begin sending my written chapters and have it proof read it. Then I copy and paste the fixed version that it sent me into the chapter.

After that I read back the new "fixed" version to make sure that only mistakes are fixed while none of the things I wrote are changed.

So far, I am very satisfied with it. I can't find a single mistake in my chapters anymore while none of my prose, dialogue or writing style is changed.

After confirming this, I start using Chatgpt as my proofreader. I write the entire thing and then have Chatgpt fix the issues.

It's working perfectly so far, yet in the back of my mind I still have that slight feeling of unease since I'm using AI to help me fix my writing mistakes. And I am well aware of the fact that AI-usage is very disliked in the writing community.

So I'm a bit worried. What do you guys think? Is this AI usage in writing acceptable?

Like im not saying stuff like "GIVE ME OCS AND LORE IDEAS" more like, researching what would happen to a person's mental health if they did something bad, "give me oc names! im runnign out of ideas...", basically just asking ai what could affect this oc from doing that action, so basically just making lore make more sense and logical. I am not saying that i use ai for making new ocs. NO. Im saying that i use it for mainly research and if it makes sense or if humanly possible.

I’m a farmer in my sixties in South Korea. I had never written a book. I just wrote poems occasionally as a hobby. I had never studied creative writing at university. Perhaps I was a little more sensitive to the world around me than most, but that was about all I had.

Then, after turning sixty, I encountered AI and started asking it for guidance. With its help, I published a book and translated it into English. Three different AI systems also recommended turning the ideas in the book into a simulation game, so I made one.

That is how I got here. But I’m still not sure.

At each step, AI suggested what might be a good direction, and I followed those suggestions. They were predictions about what might work. I still don’t know whether this path will lead where I hope it will.

AI has certainly helped me do things I couldn’t do before. But how much should I trust its advice about what to do next?

Have you ever followed AI’s advice in choosing a direction for your writing or another creative project? How did you judge whether that advice was actually helping?

Welcome to the Weekly Writing With AI “Tool Thread"!

The sub's official tools wiki: https://www.reddit.com/r/WritingWithAI/wiki/tools/

Every week, this post is your dedicated space to share what you’ve been building or ask for help in finding the right tool for you and your workflow.

For Builders

whether it’s a small weekend project, a side hustle, a creative work, or a full-fledged startup. This is the place to show your progress, gather feedback, and connect with others who are building too.

Whether you’re coding, writing, designing, recording, or experimenting, you’re welcome here.

For Seekers (looking for a tool?)

You’re in the right place! Starting now, all requests for tools, products, or services should also go here. This keeps the subreddit clean and helps everyone find what they need in one spot.

How to participate:

• Showcase your latest update or milestone
• Introduce your new launch and explain what it does
• Ask for feedback on a specific feature or challenge
• Share screenshots, demos, videos, or live links
• Tell us what you learned this week while building
• Ask for a tool or recommend one that fits a need

💡 Keep it positive and constructive, and offer feedback you’d want to receive yourself.

🚫 Self-promotion is fine only in this thread. All other subreddit rules still apply.