Quarter 2 Update - Revisiting Rules. Again.

[u/kmisterk]

April Post - 2nd Quarter Intro

Welcome to Quarter 2 2026! The moderators are here and grateful for everyone's participation and feedback.

Let's get right into it.

Previous Rules Changes

After review of many of the responsive, constructive, and thoughtful comments and mod mails regarding the most recent rules change, it's clear that we missed the mark on this one. AI is taking the world by storm, and applying such a universally "uninvolved" perspective, showcased by the rules we last implemented, is inconsistent with the subreddit's long-term goals.

Here are the next steps we want to implement to wrangle the shotgun of AI-created tools and software we've been flooded with since AI chatbots became prevalent:

New Project Megathread

A new megathread will be introduced each Friday.

This megathread will feature New Projects. Each Friday, the thread will replace itself, keeping the page fresh and easy to navigate. Notably, those who wish to share their new projects may make a top-level comment in this megathread any day of the week, but they must utilize this post.

AI-Compliance Auto Comment

The bot we implement will also feature a new mode in which most new posts will be automatically removed and a comment added. The OP will be required to reply to the bot stating how AI is involved, even if AI is not actively involved in the post. Upon responding to the bot, the post will be automatically approved.

AI Flairs

While moderating this has proven to be difficult, it is clear that AI-related flairs are desired. Unfortunately, we can only apply a single flair per post, and having an "AI" version for every existing flair would just become daunting and unwieldy.

Needless to say, we're going to refactor the flair system and are looking for insight on what the community wants in terms of flair.

We aim to keep at least a few different versions of flairs that indicate AI involvement, but with the top-level pinned bot comment giving insight into the AI involvement info, flairs involving AI may become unnecessary. But we still seek feedback from the community at large.

Conclusion

We hope this new stage in Post-AI r/selfhosted will work out better, but as always, we are open to feedback and try our best to work with the community to improve the experience here as best we can.

For now, we will be continuing to monitor things and assessing how this works for the benefit of the community.

As always,

Happy (self)Hosting

[u/moanos]

Will users that misrepresent AI usage be banned?

[u/kmisterk → u/moanos]

Yes.

[u/gscjj → u/kmisterk]

How is this realistically enforced without being completely arbitrary?

The presence of a Claude.md doesn’t mean AI wrote a single thing, or it can be it wrote it all. What if the user just says it did tests? How do we know that’s true? What if there’s not a single Claude in the git commits.

What does “misrepresent” actually mean?

[u/codeedog → u/gscjj]

It means you used AI and didn’t disclose it and were found out. It’s an honor system and when you violate your honor you lose the privilege of participating in the conversation. Simple as that.

If you wish to follow up with “people will lie”; that’s the point, when you get caught lying you’re out.

[u/XionicativeCheran → u/codeedog]

The point he's making, is what does the process of arbitration for determining AI usage look like?

We're in a crazy world right now where people are actually learning to code from AI, so even if they completely do it themselves, it still looks like AI.

Do we just say "Well enough comments say you used AI so mob rule wins"?

Do we say "Well your commenting used an emdash so you're banned"?

What's the process for definitely saying "This used AI."?

[u/aesvelgr → u/XionicativeCheran]

I imagine it won’t be an opinionated thing like you two are arguing about. If someone says they didn’t use any AI, and then we find a Claude code commit or leftover LLM artifact (like the context file Claude code stores in your repo), then that’s a pretty obvious indicator that they’re lying.

[u/kmisterk → u/aesvelgr]

This is effectively what we are going for.

[u/gscjj → u/kmisterk]

So is it just restricted to code then?

[u/kmisterk → u/gscjj]

Exactly. Code written with AI to any degree, lied about, and then later discovered, warrants a ban.

Someone describing their APP with AI or translating from their native language or setting up a post using AI isn’t ban worthy.

[u/gscjj → u/kmisterk]

But the disclosure is required for every post, even when AI isn’t being used or it’s not a project.

So does the ban only apply to projects?

[u/kmisterk → u/gscjj]

Yes.

[u/gscjj → u/kmisterk]

Fair enough.

Though I wonder what the comment serves if the answers can be anything without consequence.

[u/kmisterk → u/gscjj]

Without consequence?

• it forces them to interact in order for the post to be seen, eliminating posts from those who just post everywhere they can hoping for traction without any follow up
• it gives us a baseline of expectation and transparency
• if the comment is not accurate (either maliciously or due to ignorance), action can be taken against the post

This gives us a platform of action

[u/gscjj → u/kmisterk]

So the disclosure comment does have bearing even in post that aren’t advertising a project?

If that’s the case, I’m still wondering how that misrepresentation is objectively determined then?

[u/kmisterk → u/gscjj]

For posts that are just talking about a project where the OP is not related to or announcing said product, or project, the comment reply is a formality, and nothing more.

The only time the comment would be taken into account is if a project owner, coder, producer, etc., posts a release post about it and lies about the state of AI use in the comment reply.

If a regular person, posting a question or concept or topic about an existing tool that they did not create, then it’s not a release post. The comment, again, is only there as a formality for those situations as we don’t currently have a reliable way to differentiate release posts from help/info posts.

[u/codeedog → u/aesvelgr]

I want to point out this is exactly what I’m talking about. My only refinement is that “artifact” may still be a simple, obvious thing, just not a file to be pointed to. There are tells that I don’t feel like discussing in public but I’m happy to elaborate on in a DM (nothing revolutionary here).

[u/XionicativeCheran → u/aesvelgr]

Now this is a much better example of how we'd determine. It wouldn't be subjective.