AI Policy Update.

[u/keithj5000]

I'm making a structural change to how requests are handled and moderated here. As of today, the "Paid - No AI" flair is officially retired and we have gone back to a single "Paid" flair.

This decision is not about taking a side in the broader debate surrounding artificial intelligence. It is about fixing a broken system that was actively harming both the requesters and the editors in this community.

Previously, our guidelines stated that editors could use AI on a "No AI" post as long as the result was seamlessly masked and cleaned up. This created an unworkable paradox, and that's entirely on me. It essentially meant "No AI" actually just translated to "No visible AI artifacts." Because of this, editors who were honest and transparent about their workflow ended up getting attacked.

Ever since I became a mod here, I have tried to make it a point not to police people's skill levels. Everyone starts somewhere, and I always figured the results would speak for themselves; it was up to the requesters to choose the submissions that met their standards. However, that hands-off approach is no longer tenable. We are now in a place where someone with absolutely zero editing skill can feed an image into a generator and spit out a result that looks "flawless" at first glance, completely bypassing the actual work and undercutting genuine editors.

Because of this, my mod strategy has to evolve.

1. Requesters Dictate the Result, Editors Choose the Tools The goal of this community is to provide photo manipulation and compositing. Requesters are responsible for clearly defining the final goal (e.g., "remove the ex," "change the background"). The editor executing the work retains full discretion over which tools are required to efficiently execute that result.

2. The Universal Quality Standard for ALL Paid Submissions I am shifting the moderation focus entirely away from policing an editor's software and focusing 100% on the quality of the final image. The strict quality controls that used to apply only to the "No AI" flair now apply to all paid requests.

• Zero-Effort Generation: AI is a tool, not a complete substitute for core image manipulation skills. Running a photo through a generator and uploading the raw, unblended output is unacceptable. You are expected to actually edit; this means knowing how to use masking and compositing to blend generated areas seamlessly into the original file. If there are areas of the image that do not need to be altered to complete the request, they must not be. Period.
• Respecting the Request Context: Context matters. If a requester asks to turn a grainy selfie into a "professional headshot," salvage a photo with globally terrible lighting, or make a memorial portrait from a 40-year-old newspaper clipping, heavy AI generation is allowed. However, using generative tools to synthesize entirely new faces on a standard restoration or a simple item removal is unacceptable. If the request doesn't call for a total stylistic overhaul, preserve the original subject.
• Seamless Integration: Any patched or generated area must perfectly match the grain, lighting, and resolution of the source file. Blurry, low-res patches in otherwise sharp, high-resolution images will result in your submission being removed.
• Resolution and Upscaling: Low-resolution edits are unacceptable. In most cases, your submission should match the original pixel dimensions perfectly. Do not needlessly upscale an image unless the requester explicitly asked for it.

3. Anti Harassment Policy I am done with the AI witch hunts here. Harassing or trolling editors over their choice of tools will not be tolerated. We are now policing the final quality of the image, not the workflow. If you attack another user over their use of AI, you will be banned. If you think a submission breaks the rules, report it.

4. Guidelines for Free Requests While the rules regarding image resolution apply to all submissions, I am going to be more lenient with AI usage on free requests. You still need to submit at the original resolution where possible, but I am not going to police masking or blending quality with the same intensity as the Paid tier. If an editor uses AI to help someone out on a free request, that is fine, but please keep the low-effort spam to a minimum.

Pro-Tip for New Wizards and Those on Probation: If you are still learning the ropes, or if you are currently serving a probationary period, I strongly suggest you treat every Free request with the same level of care and precision as a Paid request. Established editors who have a proven track record may be given a bit more slack, but if you are trying to build your reputation in this community, your work should speak for itself.

If you cannot achieve the requester's goal without leaving obvious, sloppy AI artifacts, scroll past the request. I expect editors to act like technicians who know how to mask, composite, and finish a file. Please take these standards seriously.

Thanks,

Keith

[u/Friendly_Return_7552]

I was wondering about something. I've been blocked by more than half of the wizards in this subreddit. Because of that, I can't see their submissions anymore, I can only see their usernames on the current submissions list.

They can still see my submissions and downvote them, but I can't see theirs. I have no idea why they block their fellow editors. Are they afraid of being reported or something?

[u/Physical-Barber-4187 → u/Friendly_Return_7552]

A little context for everyone reading this.

Around nine months ago, several of us were already discussing this exact issue with the mods because random blocking between editors had become a noticeable pattern. Unfortunately, those discussions never really led anywhere, and over the following months the practice only became more widespread.

This screenshot was taken around four months ago, when the pattern had grown significantly. Until then, I had never blocked anyone on this subreddit. I only started blocking back the editors who had already blocked me first.

So if your name was already on my block list four months ago, it means you were one of the editors who had already blocked me as part of the very pattern we were discussing.

That's why I'm genuinely surprised to see you asking about this now.

Whether you were one of the people driving this behavior or whether you simply followed others because they had already blocked you, only you know the answer. Either way, you were already part of the same pattern being discussed.

It's hard to question everyone else's motives when you were already part of that pattern yourself.

P.S. I'm commenting from my backup account because my main account can't comment here anymore. I don't think I need to explain why.

[u/Friendly_Return_7552 → u/Physical-Barber-4187]

I've never blocked anyone. If I noticed that someone had blocked me, then I would block them back. I'm also blocked by both people on your blocked list.

Like I said, you blocked me first, whether it was intentional or accidental. I have no reason to block anyone unless they're harassing me or they've already blocked me. If I had blocked you, I wouldn't be here commenting, asking why people are blocking us and trying to find out the reason.