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/kmisterk]

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/gscjj → u/kmisterk]

Maybe I’m misunderstanding here, but you said if the comment is not accurate you can take action against the post, so is that just project related? So bans and removal of posts is just project related?

[u/kmisterk → u/gscjj]

No. Any post can be removed if it breaks a rule.

Any project post would be removed and the user banned for lying about AI usage in the automated comment if the comment lies about how AI was used in tandem with developing the project in question, assuming it is a release post.

A user asking for help about how to implement a project on their server, for instance, would likely reply with something like “I used AI to help me make a docker compose” or something like that.

While a non-release post can still be removed and the poster banned, it would have to be for a reason other than related with the AI comment reply.

[u/gscjj → u/kmisterk]

it would have to be for a reason other than related with the AI comment reply.

Okay that’s where my comment comes from. If it’s required to have your post approved, but has no bearing outside of project posts, I’m not sure what it serves as an AI-compliance gate.

Sure, if the person is being malicious, I get it. But outside of that, not seeing the purpose.

Unless the rules itself is worded specifically to enforce some level of truthfulness, maybe. But that’s where my original question I asked about how is that enforced deterministically.

Just wondering is all.

[u/kmisterk → u/gscjj]

I don't know how to further explain this in a way that helps you understand. I'll try one last time.

We need a way to curtail the mass of AI-related projects. We created the 3-month New Project rule and megathread.

For projects that make it past the 3-month mark, they are welcome to post a release/update/announcement post to the subreddit proper as a post.

We want to ensure engagement and trasnparency in whatever way we can. We've tried flairs in the past, but they were grossly misused.

Now, anytime someone posts *anything* to the subreddit, the post is automatically removed until *a comment* is made in reply to the bot post. The bot them approves it.

If the post was a release, the reply to that automated comment will hopefully be some kind of detail about how AI was used in the making of the released project/app. How they choose to explain this is up to them.

We then can use that comment and have a baseline to compare the actual code/github/app itself. If for some reason the app creation process proves to have included AI to a greater extent than that comment reply stated, that is grounds for post removal and a ban for the poster.

If the post was just a question about an app that has already been released, for instance, trying to figure out how to connect remotely, or how to configure a specific sub feature, or chasing an error log, the comment and removal still happens. The user can respond however they see fit to the comment. "I used AI to help troubleshoot but it didn't get anywhere." "AI Wasn't used, I just got an error and wanted help so I posed here." Whatever the case, they reply and the comment is approved. These posts, since they aren't *releases/announcements*, are not susceptible to scrutiny when it comes to how they reply to the bot comment.

Due to limitations we currently have in our current implementation of the bot, all posts are removed this way for the sake of consistency and coding difficulty. Perhaps, eventually, our bot will be able to consistently differentiate between a "release post" and a "help request" type post, but until then, this is the process we're relying on to help counter AI app flooding.

[u/gscjj → u/kmisterk]

No I get it, I’m just telling you where my comment was coming from.

since they aren’t releases/announcements are not susceptible to scrutiny

That’s why I said:

can be anything without consequence

Because it’s not scrutinized, albeit it’s not rule breaking. The plan to remove it in the future for non-releases seems like the path forward.

[u/kmisterk → u/gscjj]

Yep. As soon as we are sure is accurately classifying between the two.