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

[Pelayori]

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.

 

[killerdelta]

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

 

[sirshaw]

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.

 

[Phokxx]

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.

 

[rio_aleksandr]

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.

 

[WETBATMAN]

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.

 

[norddevelopment]

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?

 

[Ronnie]

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.

 

[3zclapz]

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.

 

[Pelayori]

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.

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

 

[3zclapz]

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

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.

 

[Pelayori]

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.

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.

 

[3zclapz]

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.

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.

 

[plasmachauvire]

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

 

[ziluq]

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