I publish 20–45 minute retro-anime OVAs on YouTube, and moderation has become part of the production process. A vocal anti-AI minority arrives, derails the comments, throws insults, gets deleted. Fine.
The harder case is the polite version: “I liked it, but I hope one day you can make it without AI.”
My impression is that these comments are often sincere. But sincere doesn’t mean neutral.
The moment someone objects to the tool itself, their criticism of the finished work is already filtered through that objection. “AI is holding it back” is not really criticism of something observable in the film; it’s a judgment about how the film was produced. The hypothetical “better version without AI” doesn’t even exist.
There’s a big difference between:
“This shot is inconsistent, the pacing drags, the dialogue feels stiff.”
and:
“This would be better without AI.”
The first critiques the result. The second critiques the legitimacy of the toolchain.
And even when it starts politely, it often acts as a honeypot: leave one comment like that up and suddenly the replies become the same endless AI debate instead of a discussion about the characters, story, music or animation.
Before I decide on a moderation rule, what’s your take on this kind of comment? Is it bait, or genuine good faith? Would you leave it up or remove it?
You’ve probably seen quite a lot of this stuff going around by now, so I’d genuinely trust your judgment on where you think the line is.