What's your opinion on giving constructive feedback for folks who do generate AI slop?

[L1aei]

My feedback is always the same. If they want to truly improve, they have to stop using AI as a crutch. It's that simple.

Imagine if we were living in a time where new technological advancements allowed the construction of affordable exoskeletons that allowed for full freedom of movement while still enhancing our strength and mobility. Now imagine if someone just started out weightlifting and instead of learning by starting from a manageable weight and learning how to lift properly, they use an exosuit to enhance their performance so they can "learn how to lift faster" and "perfect their form." Do you think they will get any stronger in any significant manner or improve their form?

Well, the answer is no. Even if they have perfect form using the exosuit, this won't translate properly when they've removed the suit because unfortunately, their body hasn't adapted at all to actually lifting the weight. Not only that, but they wouldn't be able to lift anywhere near the amount they could using the exosuit. So... What do they do? Crawl back into the exosuit.

It's the exact same thing with writing.

Your analogy bounced off of my head in a different direction and the blunt force trauma triggered a better one. So instead of us envisioning exoskeletons or exosuits, we could simply point at weightlifters who rely on performance enhancers. Like, AI is a tool, so are performance enhancers... like steroids; they don't automatically make someone weak until it gets to the point of it being abuse. That means if there's no foundational training, yeah, what we have here is our bodies collapsing. But if real practice is still happening, it's assistance, not replacement... again, that is only if there isn't an abusive over reliance on it.

Let me put it this way, if I am right clicking on red squiggly, underlined words to enable spellcheck, that doesn't mean I'll forget how to spell... maybe after a few shots, but that's beside my point here.

 

[Deleted member 34529]

What's yours?

If it's written by A.I., feedback should be generated by an A.I., no?

E.G.

Please give positive feedback on the following text.

Please give negative feedback on the following text.

 

[L1aei]

If it's written by A.I., feedback should be generated by an A.I., no?

E.G.

Please give positive feedback on the following text.

Please give negative feedback on the following text.

NGL, that sounds pretty damn fair; you do you.

 

[ViktorBloodfallen]

The feed back would be "write it yourself" there is something endearing about amateurish writing. It has a soul, a human's voice. Slop could never replicate that. Everyone is so afraid to be imperfect, when perfection is an ideal and not attainable. I dunno.

 

[gaylolis]

i personally only use it as a 'reader' by copy pasting my chapter saying it was some novel i found and i kinda just see the different points of view that may not be apparent for me alone but yea i do the writing myself and wont even bother to listen to any of its corrections and just do things my way haha

probably still better than waiting for a reader that may not ever come or nagging someone to read my work when it's not even interesting to them

 

[HungrySheep]

performance enhancers

Performance enhancers as in steroids or stuff like BCAA supplements? There's a good reason why the former is banned in the vast majority of reputable tournaments. And while you're correct in that you still have to lift in order to achieve results using steroids, it's much less impressive to be built using steroids as opposed to being built naturally. Can you tell? Usually, yeah. If not, the lab can.

But this does bring up an interesting discussion. If you're using AI as assistance, why not use something else as assistance instead? When I was just starting out, I used to read a lot. I picked up em dash usage from translated copies of the Monogatari series, descriptive prose from 86, and many other techniques from various literary works. Why did I select those two novels in particular? Because the original text isn't written in English and they aren't really pieces written primarily to be deeply philosophical or thought-provoking for the audience, though they certainly have underlying themes that can be.

I tried writing in different styles using techniques I cobbled together from stuff I enjoyed. Was it good? Hell no. But I learned from the experience. I actively used my brain to work around problems. I couldn't look at the book and expect it to instantly solve my issue or write my scene for me. It couldn't suggest a phrase or sentence for me. All it could do was show me how something I enjoyed was written and encourage me to write something that I could enjoy too.

More succinctly, I had to use my own brain to improve my writing regardless of how much reference material I had. I needed to develop the skill to do that.

With AI, you're skipping that important step. If I could just look at the book and go "Hey, NISIOISIN/Asato Asato, can you rewrite this for me so it's ten billion times better?" and they'd do it for me, I wouldn't have learned anything at all. I would've just went "Cool, thanks!" and copied word-for-word what they wrote and that would be problem solved. This is, unfortunately, what the vast majority of writers who use AI-assistance do. The moment there's something that needs brushing up, they immediately run to the AI and say "Hey, can you rewrite this for me, but make it more/less X?" and when the LLM spits the answer back to them, they read over it, copy it, and paste it into their novel without thinking anything of it.

Because why would they? After all, they wrote the original sentence themselves. The AI only helped them brush it up a little. Like spellcheck... Right?

Except now, the next time they run into a similar problem, they can't rewrite that scene or sentence themselves. They need to go to the AI again. They didn't improve at all.

 

[L1aei]

The feed back would be "write it yourself" there is something endearing about amateurish writing. It has a soul, a human's voice. Slop could never replicate that. Everyone is so afraid to be imperfect, when perfection is an ideal and not attainable. I dunno.

You get it; writers can't be better if they're already perfect. Embrace the mistakes and keep on learning!

i personally only use it as a 'reader' by copy pasting my chapter saying it was some novel i found and i kinda just see the different points of view that may not be apparent for me alone but yea i do the writing myself and wont even bother to listen to any of its corrections and just do things my way haha

probably still better than waiting for a reader that may not ever come or nagging someone to read my work when it's not even interesting to them

I've done that a few times with concept ideas that popped in my head; things I don't want to bother somebody with a conscience because I would already feel the judging stares before they finish reading it. Case in point: my latest concept idea was about elderly magical girls coming out of retirement.

Performance enhancers as in steroids or stuff like BCAA supplements? There's a good reason why the former is banned in the vast majority of reputable tournaments. And while you're correct in that you still have to lift in order to achieve results using steroids, it's much less impressive to be built using steroids as opposed to being built naturally. Can you tell? Usually, yeah. If not, the lab can.

But this does bring up an interesting discussion. If you're using AI as assistance, why not use something else as assistance instead? When I was just starting out, I used to read a lot. I picked up em dash usage from translated copies of the Monogatari series, descriptive prose from 86, and many other techniques from various literary works. Why did I select those two novels in particular? Because the original text isn't written in English and they aren't really pieces written primarily to be deeply philosophical or thought-provoking for the audience, though they certainly have underlying themes that can be.

I tried writing in different styles using techniques I cobbled together from stuff I enjoyed. Was it good? Hell no. But I learned from the experience. I actively used my brain to work around problems. I couldn't look at the book and expect it to instantly solve my issue or write my scene for me. It couldn't suggest a phrase or sentence for me. All it could do was show me how something I enjoyed was written and encourage me to write something that I could enjoy too.

More succinctly, I had to use my own brain to improve my writing regardless of how much reference material I had. I needed to develop the skill to do that.

With AI, you're skipping that important step. If I could just look at the book and go "Hey, NISIOISIN/Asato Asato, can you rewrite this for me so it's ten billion times better?" and they'd do it for me, I wouldn't have learned anything at all. I would've just went "Cool, thanks!" and copied word-for-word what they wrote and that would be problem solved. This is, unfortunately, what the vast majority of writers who use AI-assistance do. The moment there's something that needs brushing up, they immediately run to the AI and say "Hey, can you rewrite this for me, but make it more/less X?" and when the LLM spits the answer back to them, they read over it, copy it, and paste it into their novel without thinking anything of it.

Because why would they? After all, they wrote the original sentence themselves. The AI only helped them brush it up a little. Like spellcheck... Right?

Except now, the next time they run into a similar problem, they can't rewrite that scene or sentence themselves. They need to go to the AI again. They didn't improve at all.

You are correct and this is why I'm going to bring up a bad memory or history of what you just described; calculators. I remember in school how much my teachers would tell us no one in this class would be carrying a calculator with them at all times. Well... we got smartphones now. I so wanna go back in time to flip some desks after all those lecturings I received.

But, yeah, that is a bad analogy to yours because I see your point behind my reflection over it. Personally? I learned to better my craft in mIRC roleplay channels; whole communities writing and... pm'ing me (same thing as dm's over on Discord) to clarify what I am doing and I'll keep working on it until I succeeded in conveying the message or action or vision in the scenes. That's how I improved.

And, yes, I agree that over reliance on AI for creative writing is misuse; abuse. But I'm not going to knock on it. What I will rap my knuckles against is anyone trying to claim what the AI wrote is their own display of creative skills; they can go gag on a big one if they desire head pats for how much they suck.

 

[MFontana]

You deserve a cookie for that.

???

Just for clarity, you mentioned there will be good with bad, that sounds fair but how hefty are they compared to each other; like we're not matching together a good featherweight with a bad heavyweight boxer here, right?

Basically, it comes down to something one of my college professors told the class when we were tasked with critiquing each-other's work.
+ For every negative thing you bring up, try to bring up something positive as well. (So for everything the person did 'wrong', try to point out something they did 'right' as well). Not the greatest explanation, but it should get the point across. I hope.

Glad you do this. I was just telling @TinaMigarlo about biased or prejudice statements from readers. Good on you.

Making assumptions about any creative work only hurts everyone involved (in my experience) so it's better to not make any.

Self reflection. Nice. I tend to do that too by speaking crudely and making the reader self-aware that they comprehended my writing because their minds were dirty at least at some point in their lives.

So just an interview, basically?

Not quite, more like keeping the critique on-topic with what the creator happened to be asking for a critique on. (If they wanted anything in particular)
For example: Let's say Bob, from accounting, wrote a little story about how much he hates Orogs, but asked for a critique on how he wrote a scene where he had the crap kicked out of him by said Orog.
The critique should be focused on that 'fight sequence', because that is what matters most to Bob in the example.

An evaluation... got it. How do you go in with a clean palate before receiving a taste of their content? Wouldn't something you read or done earlier leave an aftertaste?

I try to go in clean and address the work for what it is on, but admittedly it isn't always easy to do.
I just do my best to compartmentalize and adhere to the standards of professionalism that were instilled in me by said professor.

You cleaned it up well and I appreciate the step-by-step process you go through. And I, along with many others, do not judge you for how you view AI; as you said, it changes nothing as a whole. AI is here to stay for quite a while and we get to watch it grow dumber as ethical morals continue to be introduced to guide the unfaithful on the enlightened path. I'll even join it on its journey growing duller with my TGIF shots.

That's fair, and I personally don't judge anyone for their choices either (whether I agree with those choices or not).

It's never safe to assume, but there are signs when the number of signs are so vast that they create a montage exhibit of that's more challenging to ignore than to detect AI involvement; usually easy to tell when there is a lack of effort covering it up, and considering the malicious sorts of AI users are lazy, the success rate of detection is high.

Perhaps, but even so, my personal approach is to refrain from making any accusatory statements ("That's AI." or "This reads like AI trash." etc etc etc) when I'm critiquing, because as I mentioned, the end goal, and purpose of the critique, is to help the individual improve their craft.

 

[HungrySheep]

I learned to better my craft in mIRC roleplay channels; whole communities writing and... pm'ing me (same thing as dm's over on Discord) to clarify what I am doing and I'll keep working on it until I succeeded in conveying the message or action or vision in the scenes. That's how I improved.

RP was a big thing for me too back in the day. We used to hop on this old Warcraft III map called SotDRP and write there. Later we swapped to GMod, then Skype, and then Discord. MUDs used to be pretty fun too!

calculators

Thanks for bringing this up. This is actually a really good example to illustrate my point. Calculators were the absolute DEATH of my brain mathematically. I used to be pretty good at math but now I can barely do normal division, subtraction, or even multiplication without a calculator. Quite frankly, it's embarrassing.

 

[L1aei]

???

Basically, it comes down to something one of my college professors told the class when we were tasked with critiquing each-other's work.
+ For every negative thing you bring up, try to bring up something positive as well. (So for everything the person did 'wrong', try to point out something they did 'right' as well). Not the greatest explanation, but it should get the point across. I hope.

I think so. You're scaling each response to be productive rather than complimentary or insulting; pragmatic.

Making assumptions about any creative work only hurts everyone involved (in my experience) so it's better to not make any.

I do make exceptions if the intent is malicious, not caring how creative it may be. That's why I went off on that fraud last week.

Not quite, more like keeping the critique on-topic with what the creator happened to be asking for a critique on. (If they wanted anything in particular)
For example: Let's say Bob, from accounting, wrote a little story about how much he hates Orogs, but asked for a critique on how he wrote a scene where he had the crap kicked out of him by said Orog.
The critique should be focused on that 'fight sequence', because that is what matters most to Bob in the example.

Okay, I do see what you meant now. Honestly, I should've done that before checking out the novels their authors requested feedback on.

I try to go in clean and address the work for what it is on, but admittedly it isn't always easy to do.
I just do my best to compartmentalize and adhere to the standards of professionalism that were instilled in me by said professor.

Word of very bad advice: couple shots of vodka may help flush out anything that lingers as you dive into the next bit of fresh content. I do not suggest it for apparent reasons.

That's fair, and I personally don't judge anyone for their choices either (whether I agree with those choices or not).


Perhaps, but even so, my personal approach is to refrain from making any accusatory statements ("That's AI." or "This reads like AI trash." etc etc etc) when I'm critiquing, because as I mentioned, the end goal, and purpose of the critique, is to help the individual improve their craft.

Understandable.

RP was a big thing for me too back in the day. We used to hop on this old Warcraft III map called SotDRP and write there. Later we swapped to GMod, then Skype, and then Discord. MUDs used to be pretty fun too!

Hm... not WCIII, but WoW. I used to hang out in Goldshire a lot on the Silverhand server.

Thanks for bringing this up. This is actually a really good example to illustrate my point. Calculators were the absolute DEATH of my brain mathematically. I used to be pretty good at math but now I can barely do normal division, subtraction, or even multiplication without a calculator. Quite frankly, it's embarrassing.

It happens. With more advancements in both the world and age, over this or that thing we rarely utilize anymore, we're going to experience atrophy.

 

[TinaMigarlo]

My feedback is always the same. If they want to truly improve, they have to stop using AI as a crutch. It's that simple.

Imagine if we were living in a time where new technological advancements allowed the construction of affordable exoskeletons that allowed for full freedom of movement while still enhancing our strength and mobility. Now imagine if someone just started out weightlifting and instead of learning by starting from a manageable weight and learning how to lift properly, they use an exosuit to enhance their performance so they can "learn how to lift faster" and "perfect their form." Do you think they will get any stronger in any significant manner or improve their form?

Well, the answer is no. Even if they have perfect form using the exosuit, this won't translate properly when they've removed the suit because unfortunately, their body hasn't adapted at all to actually lifting the weight. Not only that, but they wouldn't be able to lift anywhere near the amount they could using the exosuit. So... What do they do? Crawl back into the exosuit.

It's the exact same thing with writing.

you're right. or should I say... you're 'write'? *giggle*
seriously though.
i think most writers can "write". some or more. or they wouldn't think they can try it.
they need something to guide them, something to imitate.
We didn't have AI when I was starting out, now they do.
they get to see universal if generic things that AI learned because everyone does them.
where did AI learn to look around the area of the MC and describe things with metaphor? writers.
where did AI learn that if its night time, there should should be some punchy "silvery moon as the blanket of the clouds peeled back like a bedsheet"? Writers.
where did AI learn that... and the answer is always... from writers. bad ones, medium ones, even good ones. we must all do these things.

maybe instead of screaming at the top of our lungs about AI and not using it as a lifelong crutch...
we shoudl be designing something *here* so they have something better.
to dance? think of those silly footprint stickers with numbers. put your feet here, and here, and here. Doing the tango!
to fight? let the aggressive fighter tackle you, but be ready for it. go with it, lock your ankles around him and hug tight behind his neck.
he's right handed, use both of your hands on his right hand, now he can't hammer you. you can last longer, its a start. you're beginning to fioght properly!

where's *our* introduction.

I suggest, a reference movie. say... any james bond movie. always a "cold open", and you see james being a hard ass. he's on a dangerous mission, he's cool under pressure. and there's action and danger. you don't get to know why, you just marvel at the violent spectacle. Tell them, to WRITE THAT SCENE. every beginner? will write that scene, fan fiction. Pretend you are being paid to "novelize" that opening scene. and we all vote on who made the best first chapter. they can do "web novel" single sentence style. Or they can do traditional paragraph paperback style. no penalty for that.

THEY get to practice a *proper* put your MC in peril, first paragraph, better yet fiorst sentence opening. No reasons, no info dumping, just describe that action and danger. I suggest "die another day". there's characters and dialogue, then chase sequence and danger.

AI will be of NO VALUE to them for this. Its a GREAT exercise. And it'll be *fun* to have a contest and we all vote and make jokes. And hey, a few old hands can join in the contest, if they think they can show us "how its done", they should be able to prove it. because, saying things like "you need a punchy first chapter" is cheap. My phrase i use IRL a lot?

"Perhaps you would care to demonstrate that procedure for my benefit."

sounds like a party, to me.

"nice. very nice. but now? Lets read Paul Allens first chapter..."

 

[Rachel_Leia_Cole]

I have directed AI to only look for punctuation and tense errors. It still misses some, but until I can get money to hire someone to go through it, it’ll have to do. I also have it scan for continuity. Sometimes, it will suggest I look at another sentence for clarity. But I have distinctly told it no rewrites. That’s why it took me so many years to finish my first book. I was still finding my way into the world and feeling out the characters. Now that I’ve lived with them for so long, the next books came easier. Not because of AI, but because I lived in that world for so long.

 

[Eldoria]

I have directed AI to only look for punctuation and tense errors. It still misses some, but until I can get money to hire someone to go through it, it’ll have to do. I also have it scan for continuity. Sometimes, it will suggest I look at another sentence for clarity. But I have distinctly told it no rewrites. That’s why it took me so many years to finish my first book. I was still finding my way into the world and feeling out the characters. Now that I’ve lived with them for so long, the next books came easier. Not because of AI, but because I lived in that world for so long.

Don't worry... Eldoria values story content more than grammar or the use of AI as an assistant.

A good story is one that has an ending... there are many stories out there that don't end (due to abandonment or other factors).

 

[unlaumy]

At this point, I have done more 'This shit is not AI' instead of pointing any works as AI. Regardless of what I think about AI, when giving feedback, I always try to be as fair as possible.

I call out AI usage when it matters, but it's more like how I call out that a story has too much of purple prose because the author keeps snorting the whole dictionary into their head. That is, even before AI I have already called out people for overusing punctuation marks for no reasons, repeating sentence structures, obsessing the same word over and over, and so on.

When amateurs do it, it's because they haven't learnt more (or some esoteric reasons). When dice app addicts do it, it's because they're loving the way their butler pampers them. Different reasons, but the expectation is the same: be better.

 

[Rachel_Leia_Cole]

Don't worry... Eldoria values story content more than grammar or the use of AI as an assistant.

A good story is one that has an ending... there are many stories out there that don't end (due to abandonment or other factors).

I spend a lot of time on content, weighing the value of one word over another. And definitely no abandonment here. Eldoria still has many tales to tell. ?

 

[mythosandmagic]

I've been writing my story, posted here on Scribblehub, for more than a decade. It has evolved slowly over the years. I believe that, because of the tools available over the last year or so, my story has now reached an acceptable level of refinement, allowing it to be seen and read as the story I've always imagined it to be. It is my story. It is my characters, my scenes, my thoughts, and my imagination. Grammarly is a wonderful tool that makes it seem like I am actually good at writing. Is that wrong? I write almost exclusively in autoCrit, and their analysis tools help me be a better author. Is that wrong? I even use ChatGPT for help with my prose. Is that wrong?

 

[Akkizakura]

I've been writing my story, posted here on Scribblehub, for more than a decade. It has evolved slowly over the years. I believe that, because of the tools available over the last year or so, my story has now reached an acceptable level of refinement, allowing it to be seen and read as the story I've always imagined it to be. It is my story. It is my characters, my scenes, my thoughts, and my imagination. Grammarly is a wonderful tool that makes it seem like I am actually good at writing. Is that wrong? I write almost exclusively in autoCrit, and their analysis tools help me be a better author. Is that wrong? I even use ChatGPT for help with my prose. Is that wrong?

Nothing wrong with that. Just don't get offended when someone tell you shouldn't rely on them all the time. Learn to be a better author while using them. No one know when the next Cloudflare blackout will happen or when the tools are no longer being supported and abandoned you can't use them anymore.

 

[JKKnotts]

Now to my questions. How do you differentiate between constructive feedback and being the local police over AI use? Like, do you address AI-influenced writing at all in your critiques, or do you focus purely on what's been delivered already on the page... do you even go that far if the request appears AI generated? Also how do you ensure your advice actually helps the authors improve rather than just pointing out that AI was used?

As for my two cents: AI generated content, in my humble opinion, is not worth giving constructive criticism over. I don't care if the person even just takes it and edits what was prompted, because then they're just attempting to make it sound less like AI and even more of a betrayal of trust. AI accusations are becoming increasingly more common and serious, so if I consider something was made with AI I'll just quietly confirm or even just block. I would have to ask why there should be constructive criticism given when mostly likely they'll just copy and paste actual people's ideas in the generator. Why should I give over my honest hard work to someone who'll most likely just plug it in without really thinking about it? There just isn't a good reason.

Because at the end of the day, there is no concrete method of identifying and determining the differences between the two with a 100% efficiency. So inevitably I will give out good advice to someone I am giving the benefit of the doubt—hell, I love em dashes and colons and semi-colons, so good luck prying them from my cold dead hands.

I think even budging slightly on our okayness with GenAI is just... not a good idea. Before AI there was already so much crap being shoved on the internet already, and AI is now making content farms even so much worse than before, and flooding our every day lives with it. Hell, even the argument "well there's no market harm done by generating pictures because there wouldn't have been a sale for a web serial book cover," is just... dumb, honestly. Sorry, I'm from a time of the earlier internet when people had to make their images for their serials, or just draw them. I'm from back when Girl Genius was starting and there when they even printed physical media. And Girl Genius was one of the better ones out there at that time. There was such a variety of style differences because no one cared if it looked good.

Sorry, but it has to be said: a lot of people on the internet have turned into snobs expecting perfect pristine covers, which is just silly. You don't need a nice ai image to better showcase your story, especially when some of the top stories have no covers at all.

If a writer isn't even doing the real bulk of the writing—even if they do all the thinking and pumps all their ideas into Claude or ChatGPT, they are doing all of us a deservice; especially themselves.

Overall, I do care about preserving authentic, fleshy and flawed voice and encouraging growth and recovery, whether AI is part of the process or not. That's my opinion. What's yours?

For me, there is a real metaphysical difference between works that are generated and those that are pain-stakingly made and agonised over. For me, I don't want so much excess that the good stuff gets buried by the crud, when there's no reason to. There's a ton of juicy good steaks with compotes on this site from classical homemade meals... why do I want to get bogged down with cheap fast food when I have access to the good stuff? If that metaphysical difference doesn't matter to you, and all you care about is the physical content just existing, then I think we'll have a hard time agreeing on this topic at all.

Controversial hot take: not everything needs to be made. Hell, lots of story ideas I had have been scrapped, reworked, and redone. Not everything I thought needed to get posted. A lot of stories need to be baked a lot longer before they get shoved out—even mine! The one I'm posting now is just a rough draft I'm flinging out for fun. Over time I'll hone it, especially if I get good criticisms.

I will also add it's a bit disingenuous to discuss AI when people are primarily against the form it takes when it's primarily generative which is what we have an issue with—hell, even sites like Grammarly and ProWritingAid are turning into abject garbage because of GenAI, so I question if we even need these tools at all when we have each other and we can give advice and communicate instead of stare at a screen and read something made by something that isn't even human...

 

[rileykifer]

I've been writing my story, posted here on Scribblehub, for more than a decade. It has evolved slowly over the years. I believe that, because of the tools available over the last year or so, my story has now reached an acceptable level of refinement, allowing it to be seen and read as the story I've always imagined it to be. It is my story. It is my characters, my scenes, my thoughts, and my imagination. Grammarly is a wonderful tool that makes it seem like I am actually good at writing. Is that wrong? I write almost exclusively in autoCrit, and their analysis tools help me be a better author. Is that wrong? I even use ChatGPT for help with my prose. Is that wrong?

Don't take this the wrong way, but if you've been writing something for ten years (with no help from AI), then shouldn't you already be able to refine your story well enough on your own? The general advice is to write regularly and you'll improve with practice, so you should be much better now than you were ten years ago. If you rely on AI for any part of the writing process, you're keeping yourself from improving and growing as a writer. If you don't care about that and want to keep using it, no one will stop you. Just know it's going to make your skills degrade over time.

 

[mythosandmagic]

Don't take this the wrong way, but if you've been writing something for ten years (with no help from AI), then shouldn't you already be able to refine your story well enough on your own? The general advice is to write regularly and you'll improve with practice, so you should be much better now than you were ten years ago. If you rely on AI for any part of the writing process, you're keeping yourself from improving and growing as a writer. If you don't care about that and want to keep using it, no one will stop you. Just know it's going to make your skills degrade over time.

I am an aircraft engineer by trade, have been writing as a hobby for 10+ years, and am certainly no English major. There have been times when I wouldn't even look at my story for a year or more, but I'd see the file on my computer, read it again, and get excited. I'd write for a while as I expanded the chapters and told more of the story. But would run out of time, and/or energy, and quit again.
However, I can truly say that, over the last year or so, my writing has improved tremendously with AI coaching. It has helped me with my prose for sure. On top of that, I have found a rhythm in my writing I never had before, and my punctuation and grammar have greatly improved, especially by paying close attention to the prompts I receive from Grammarly.
So, to flatly say AI is bad, to me, is wrong in the way I use it.
If I were to just create a prompt, let AI write it, and post it as my own, even I believe that would be wrong.
Does any of this make sense? Am I wrong in the way I use it?