<h3>Some context</h3>
<p>This is news to me, so please don't read anything into what actions I might have taken or did not take.  I devote my time to this site, not to SE generally; but I would think that in any real strike the organizers would (at the very least) have attempted to contact all diamond mods across the system.</p>
<h3>About the letter</h3>
<p>I have followed some of the Meta discussion about AI-generated content and am aware of SE's recent statements about it.  However, I have not even read the entire open letter because its governing assumption, &quot;Stack Overflow, Inc. has decreed a near-total prohibition on moderating AI-generated content,&quot; does not accord with the facts as I know them.  That misconstrues the statements I have read and appears to me like an overblown reaction.  Unless additional, contrary facts come to my attention, I don't think I will be signing that letter nor changing my interaction with the site.</p>
<h3>Implications for us</h3>
<p>As far as how CV moderates AI-generated content, <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators">your diamond mods</a> have been discussing this privately for over half a year (since the public release of ChatGPT).  My sense is we had developed a consensus that we should continue moderating posts <em>on their intrinsic merits</em> -- not on whether a chatbot (or for that matter, a computer algebra system or even a calculator) was employed to create them.  (Personally--this might not be part of the consensus--I see potential advantages in the <em>judicious</em> use of chatbots to perform research and improve writing style, <em>provided the poster takes responsibility for the accuracy of their work.</em>)</p>
<h3>What your mods have been doing</h3>
<p>We are, however, closely monitoring the site for evidence of <em>abuse</em> of chatbots and we have been quick to close down activity that reflects such abuse, such as posts that spew statistical nonsense or users who appear to be spamming the site with nothing but chatbot output.  But this doesn't require any change in our moderation policy at all and, as far as I can tell, is consistent with recent policy statements from SE.</p>
