[Poll] Policy on AI Generated resources (plugins, etc)

What should be the policy regarding new plugins made with AI (entirely or mostly)

  • Do nothing, let all plugins be approved (if compliant) even if they are AI Generated

  • Add a Made by AI (or mostly) tag

  • Forbid content generated by AI

Results are only viewable after voting.
Pelayori

Pelayori

Administrator
Staff member
As some of you may have noticed these recent times, influx of resources that seem to be entirely (or mostly) AI generated has grown to a noticeable quantity at this point and our review process for new resources and updates has slowed down considerably given the sheer amount of approvals that queue up daily.
For this matter we want to ask you, the users of the arkapi ecosystem, because we feel like you may have a say on this topic. Therefore vote on your preferred stance on how we moderate "vibe-coded" plugins, or those that seem slop and just want to fulfill the 2 free plugins requirement to post paid plugins.
 
My personal Stance

I have seen some good things done
However your point of fulfill the 2 free plugins requirement to post paid plugins.
Thats a big issue
I also think we should do it that any AI plugin made to replace another persons plugin especially paid ones
That should be dropped as if it is slop because the whole idea is sloppy
 
With all the recent API updates and plugins needing to be updated, its particularly frustrating when its found out that a plugin is almost entirely coded by AI and unable to be fixed in a timely manner. Labels are definitely needed so it can help us community owners make more informed decisions.
 
There can be some good stuff made with the support of AI, if the person making it is taking true care and creativity in the process - and banning these resources would be sad.

But . I think any ai or suspected ai pluggins should be tagged, cannot be 'paid', and should not contribute toward to the two-free-plugin count.
 
I'll share my thoughts on this as well.

Personally, I don't think AI-generated plugins have a place in our community - not because AI itself is bad, but because of the consequences it can have. Plugins run on live servers. It affect performance, stability, player data, and compatibility with every game update. Developer should fully understand the code they publish. AI is a great tool for learning, brainstorming, or speeding up repetitive work, but it shouldn't replace that understanding.
My biggest concern is that AI dramatically lowers the barrier to publishing software. Someone can generate a plugin in a few hours that appears to work, while having very little understanding of what it's actually doing or what side effects it may have. I also think about community as a whole. For many server owners, the first plugin they install shapes their opinion of plugins in general. If that first experience is with an unstable AI-generated plugin, they don't just lose trust in that plugin - they lose trust in plugins altogether. That hurts every developer who spends countless hours writing, testing, maintaining, and supporting their work.
I'd actually be in favor of stricter moderation. I think developers should be able to explain how their plugin works internally, what methods it uses, why those methods were chosen, what impact they have on performance, and how the plugin behaves under different conditions. If you can't explain your own implementation, you probably aren't ready to distribute it.
I believe AI should assist developers, not replace the knowledge and responsibility required to publish software that other people depend on.
 
In my personal opinion, vibe-coded plugins should outright not be allowed on the forum; most of these slop plugins copy another open source plugin because that's what the LLM's were trained on, and furthermore even if a flair option was added for AI content, most developers that ONLY vibe code would not self assign the AI tag because it reduces their credibility, which in turn causes staff to spend more time manually reviewing such resources to manually assign AI tags.
 
There are some good questions that should be asked, The majority of plugins on site are using AI generated images do they get tags? The majority of the plugins with their own websites are using AI generated websites are those plugins labeled aswell? What about plugin developers that use ChatGPT to translate or create product descriptions are those AI labels? What about developers that use Themida and obfuscate all their source code how would verification happen on that?

In my case I'm native Sweden so English isn't my first language and I use ChatGPT to translate and generate product descriptions would that be AI? There's good questions and dialog to ask around the topic.

I voted to have AI content removed but is descriptions, images, websites and such that the majority of plugins have are those gonna be removed?
 
Here are my 1 & 1/2 cents, for what they are worth.

I was the first person to use plugins for ARK. Michidu was the mastermind behind the system, while I spent countless hours testing, providing ideas, and helping identify what server owners needed. His original goal was to create an open platform where plugins could be developed and shared freely.

Unfortunately, that model became difficult to sustain. There were only a limited number of developers capable of creating and maintaining plugins, while demand continued to grow. As a result, paid plugins naturally became part of the ecosystem. I have always supported developers charging for their work. Developing and maintaining quality plugins requires time, skill, and effort, and that work deserves to be compensated.

Nearly ten years later, I have spent thousands of dollars on plugins. Some were exceptional. In fact, there were plugins that were created once, survived nearly a decade of ARK updates and changes, and continued working without major issues. Others were far less successful. Some were purchased, abandoned, or ultimately became a complete waste of money. Even in those situations, I never requested a refund.

What has been far more frustrating is the number of times I have had to repeatedly ask developers, through direct messages or support Discords, for updates to address crashes, broken features, or other serious problems. In many cases, months would pass without an update, and sometimes the issues were never addressed at all.

That brings me back to Pela's question. I fully support allowing AI generated plugins and plugins created by new developers. I also strongly disagree with the argument that an AI assisted plugin should not be allowed to replace or compete with an existing paid plugin.

Competition should not be restricted simply because someone created a paid plugin first. If a developer maintains a stable, reliable, well supported, and feature-rich product, they should have little to worry about. The developers who may feel threatened are those who released a paid plugin, stopped improving it, failed to provide proper support, or have not added meaningful features in years.

The fact that a plugin is paid should not protect it from competition. Any developer should be allowed to create an alternative and challenge the existing product. That is how markets improve.

In my opinion, allowing AI-assisted and newly developed plugins will create healthy competition. It will encourage existing developers to improve their products, provide better support, release updates more consistently, and continue adding value for the people who paid for their work.

And at the end of the day, server owners like myself know what is slop and not slop. What is quality work and what is shit work. But that should be up to server owners to decide.
 
Last edited:
I'm All for the no AI stance - but how will this be enforced - are you assuming people are going to show you their source code ? because if that's the case then I'm against it. (I'm not saying this is going to happen but) Some of the guys running the site are also selling plugins and now your showing them your source code , whats to stop your code being used in other projects , and then passed off as a new feature - or i just thought of this ? What measure are there to prevent the users IP from being stolen ? [Once again - I want to be clear I'm not saying this is going to happen but how will IP theft be managed ?] - I'll wait for a response on how this would be implemented - because i would rather build my own site to sell on then expose my source code - but that's just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
3zclapz said:
I'm All for the no AI stance - but how will this be enforced - are you assuming people are going to show you their source code ? because if that's the case then I'm against it. (I'm not saying this is going to happen but) Some of the guys running the site are also selling plugins and now your showing them your source code , whats to stop your code being used in other projects , and then passed off as a new feature - or i just thought of this ? What measure are there to prevent the users IP from being stolen ? [Once again - I want to be clear I'm not saying this is going to happen but how will IP theft be managed ?] - I'll wait for a response on how this would be implemented - because i would rather build my own site to sell on then expose my source code - but that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
I think it's a general consensus that handing source code wouldn't be an accepted practice. We do not have anything in place yet, the poll is mainly to see where people sit on, then if results are revealing, we may (or may not) put such policy in place, but source code scan I dont think that would work.
If, say, we were to add an "AI Generated" tag, we would firstly work based on honesty, we would expect to you to add it. It would be helpful for everyone and not all AI content is bad, just users should have all the info. If there was failure to comply we would have to think how to proceed, but eventually we would notice so it's not a matter of if, just when.

This is all just out loud thoughts so take it with a grain of salt :)
 
Pelayori said:
I think it's a general consensus that handing source code wouldn't be an accepted practice. We do not have anything in place yet, the poll is mainly to see where people sit on, then if results are revealing, we may (or may not) put such policy in place, but source code scan I dont think that would work.
If, say, we were to add an "AI Generated" tag, we would firstly work based on honesty, we would expect to you to add it. It would be helpful for everyone and not all AI content is bad, just users should have all the info. If there was failure to comply we would have to think how to proceed, but eventually we would notice so it's not a matter of if, just when.

This is all just out loud thoughts so take it with a grain of salt :)
Click to expand...
Did you by any chance get my message on helping with the API ? I offered assistance after seeing how busy you guys were after the whole PDB situation - I sent a message through WETBATMAN. If you need help with the free plugins or with the API itself i can assist. - i did also send a friend invite on discord , but yeah let me know.
 
3zclapz said:
Did you by any chance get my message on helping with the API ? I offered assistance after seeing how busy you guys were after the whole PDB situation - I sent a message through WETBATMAN. If you need help with the free plugins or with the API itself i can assist. - i did also send a friend invite on discord , but yeah let me know.
Click to expand...
I don't remember, however outside the group we take contributions trough Pull Requests in GitHub, so if you have something to add you can make a PR. Regarding cloud dumper we are working on it and we know what is going on, it's not easy but we have our ideas.
 
Pelayori said:
I don't remember, however outside the group we take contributions trough Pull Requests in GitHub, so if you have something to add you can make a PR. Regarding cloud dumper we are working on it and we know what is going on, it's not easy but we have our ideas.
Click to expand...
All good , just offering an extra set of hands and BTW I know you guys got this , didn't doubt it , just seeing if there is any workload that could be shared.
 
A : "Do nothing, let all plugins be approved (if compliant) even if they are AI Generated"

I'm a cluster owner, and a developper. I've bought a lot of plugins and i'm renewing them every year.

I would say : let the market work. If a plugin is not good, if the developper is not able to maintain, fix, improve, people will leave it.

Plugins owners, you already made a really good job and we'll still use your plugins, YOU have the knowledge : use it to make new plugins helped by AI, or use it to help troubleshoot your current issues.

If some people are now trying to make new plugins with AI, it means they identified a need for it, and they try to fullfill it : let them do, take ideas, and if needed, do it better.

We want the best content, we should not get rid of helpful technologies by fear.

I would even go further : why would we need to publish 2 plugins before being able to monetize them ?
I'll take myself as an example : I've had some plugins i would want, i've considered taking time to start making them using AI for the bases, to fullfill the needs, and then writing myself the code to be exactly what i need. I would have done one plugin, for one specific need, why could'nt i sell this only plugin ? In my position, i would consider making a 2nd shitty plugin and post it, just to be able to monetize my first one, is'nt the rule provoking the exact behaviour we want to get rid of ?

Thanks for taking time to read it all,
Have a good day,
TBD cluster
 
AI is a significant development that should not be ignored. We can either resist it or embrace it as a tool to accelerate and improve the development process.
The growing number of new developers is beneficial, as increased competition can lead to higher-quality plugins and greater innovation.

For these reasons, I support allowing AI-generated content.

Reviewing every plugin specifically for AI-generated code seems like an inefficient use of time, unless the process can be automated.

Let the market do its thing, don't be afraid of innovation.

With kind regards,
NomadArk
 
1+1=2 this this equation is is the result of a prompt. " give me the absolute most basic example of an equation . "
The question is how are we going to ban 1+1=2 without breaking some one who just needs to add 1+1? With code, the art is the vision most of the time. Logic based. A person or a calculator will "generate" the same answer. Math can represent artistic vision but it is not art and as long as someone knows how to direct the project or has a basic understanding of what he is asking the calculator to do then we should be able to use one. Using a calculator is not math slop... Its just math.
I think I'm probably not going to share my roleplay system that was vibe coded to [too much ai hate to share] and works really well and my servermates thanks its an awesome.... Idea.... That ai found the math to produce.
If only all ideas where this easy to bring to fruition.
 
Having a tag for "AI generated" is a good idea in principal, but it's effectively an honesty system that will probably only punish people who are honest and have no impact on people that aren't.

Enforcement would be difficult without access to the source code.

I can definitely sympathise with the increased workload to your team for reviews of new products, and token gestures like this might help slow that down for you guys.

I've "vibe coded" my fair share of personal projects. It's a tool like any other tool. It's only as good as the person using it.

I feel like the bigger issue is less that people who vibe code a product don't usually understand that releasing a product for public consumption is actually a commitment to ongoing support of that product.
Fixing bugs, communicating with users, maintaining the product when there are updates etc.

Perhaps some kind of user review system with scores for quality of the product, customer service/support etc.
Then instead of locking your monetization behind 2 free plugin releases, lock it behind 2 free releases that have met a quality score (minimum users, minimum reviews, minimum average rating for customer service, minimum average rating for product quality)
 
As a server owner,

I believe everyone deserves a chance, but I see no justification for indiscriminately opening the door to just anyone; there is currently a trend of repetition and copying in the world of plugins—many are merely clones that perform the exact same function.

I was once misled by someone claiming to be a plugin developer; I paid $100 for a chat plugin that turned out to be AI-generated and didn't work properly.

For the record, I have developed several plugins myself using AI—despite having limited programming expertise—and they run very efficiently. Nevertheless, paid plugins remain essential—they are the lifeblood of my servers—and the support I receive from their developers when issues arise due to Ark updates is crucial to me; they save me time and effort, allowing me to focus on other matters.

so , I believe they deserve a chance, but with better organization and the establishment of more regulatory rules.

Therefore, I am committed to providing the best services to the players in my community by collaborating with trusted and experienced developers in the field; for me, product quality and the developer's reputation matter more than price.

Kudos to the ARK API Team , thank you all for your efforts.
 
Running a fairly big cluster here and I've been buying plugins for years, renew most of them every season, so this is coming from the owner side not the dev side.

The slop is real but for me it's a support problem more than a code problem. I honestly don't care if AI helped write something as long as there's a real person behind it who understands it and shows up when the next update breaks everything. This whole PDB/API mess was a perfect example of that. The plugins that came back quick were the ones with an actual dev who knew their own code, and the ones that went quiet are the ones I'm looking to replace now. That's the part AI makes worse, it's easy to ship something that looks fine and then disappear the second it needs real maintenance.

That said I don't think a ban actually does much. You can't enforce it without source and nobody's going to hand that over, so "forbid AI" mostly just pushes the honest people out while the rest keep doing what they're doing. A tag I can get behind even on the honor system, because at least it gives us something to go on when we're deciding what to trust on a live server.

The bigger fix imo is the 2 free plugins rule. If you're trying to stop people dumping throwaway junk just to unlock paid posting, maybe stop making them post two things first. Gate it on quality instead, ratings or real user counts or whatever, so the incentive is to make one good plugin instead of two bad ones. Right now that rule is kind of causing the exact thing this poll is about.

Either way, appreciate you actually asking the owners on this one. Doesn't happen often.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top