15 Jul 2026, 04:30
AI and background images
Absolutely possible to have volunteer art or even one public domain image [e.g. art museums tend to keep online, high quality public domain image archives (The Met, Smithsonian, etc)] for the site's login, if nothing else. These are still solutions and I feel assuming that these options are still not worth discussing to nearly the same length as the others is very disappointing.
Otherwise, thank you for your intensive work, Zach.
❝ and i have nothing else to do, but bury my love for you ❞
♡ so what are you going to do about it?⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀♡ free and discounted avatars on smitten
꒰nothing꒱꒰fill an application꒱꒰seek out lour꒱
15 Jul 2026, 04:40
AI and background images
This may very well be the last message I post on Juliette as I am waiting to be deactivated, but I felt the need to share my view here in favour of those against the use of AI, as I am 100% against Gen AI in any capacity. We do not need Generative AI. We have never needed it. It steals from humans and destroys the environment. It is not a technology that we ‘need to get used to’, as some have said in this thread. There is a difference between the invention of a phone and the invention of Gen AI, for instance. Anything you can do with AI can already be done elsewhere, all it is doing is stealing this information and putting it on a silver platter for those who don’t care about the consequences to easily digest.
In the case of AI generated backgrounds, plenty of users have already provided alternatives that many seem happy with, yet they are being shut down. I personally do not understand why we are disregarding the idea of volunteering because ‘what if people don’t commit’ when this site is really built on people committing to characters for years, as it runs in real-time. Why do we not trust users who have dedicated seven or more years of their life to this site to dedicate even more time to making the site beautiful, with human art? Especially when they have said they want to.
I would also like to mention the time when Zach did not want to add advertisements to site because it went against the ‘soul of the site’. Does AI generating art not also go against the soul of a site that is built on human creativity? We can’t use AI for our writing because it is a writing site, but writing is art, and so much of this site is comprised of human made code, banners, and aesthetics that adds flavour to the writing. I personally believe you can’t pick and choose when and what you use Gen AI for. If it’s okay for AI images, that is a slippery slope to slowly allowing it to be okay for other things.
My point being, the core of this site is the human community that contributes the writing and the art to it. This is the same community that, from what I’ve seen, are majority against the use of AI backgrounds. I think you are doing a disservice to your player base if you don’t want to at least try the other alternatives (i.e. volunteer art, textured backgrounds, plain backgrounds, royalty free images) before settling for a toggle option that very few seem to want.
I do hope this all makes sense since it’s late for me and I wanted to get this up before heading to bed, but if anyone requires further clarification I am willing to do so (if I’m not deactivated first).
In the case of AI generated backgrounds, plenty of users have already provided alternatives that many seem happy with, yet they are being shut down. I personally do not understand why we are disregarding the idea of volunteering because ‘what if people don’t commit’ when this site is really built on people committing to characters for years, as it runs in real-time. Why do we not trust users who have dedicated seven or more years of their life to this site to dedicate even more time to making the site beautiful, with human art? Especially when they have said they want to.
I would also like to mention the time when Zach did not want to add advertisements to site because it went against the ‘soul of the site’. Does AI generating art not also go against the soul of a site that is built on human creativity? We can’t use AI for our writing because it is a writing site, but writing is art, and so much of this site is comprised of human made code, banners, and aesthetics that adds flavour to the writing. I personally believe you can’t pick and choose when and what you use Gen AI for. If it’s okay for AI images, that is a slippery slope to slowly allowing it to be okay for other things.
My point being, the core of this site is the human community that contributes the writing and the art to it. This is the same community that, from what I’ve seen, are majority against the use of AI backgrounds. I think you are doing a disservice to your player base if you don’t want to at least try the other alternatives (i.e. volunteer art, textured backgrounds, plain backgrounds, royalty free images) before settling for a toggle option that very few seem to want.
I do hope this all makes sense since it’s late for me and I wanted to get this up before heading to bed, but if anyone requires further clarification I am willing to do so (if I’m not deactivated first).
sta • 8 | eva • 8 | str • 2 | wis • 7 | arc • 7 | acc • 8
excellent fun 'til you get to know her.
the bolter - taylor swift
excellent fun 'til you get to know her.
the bolter - taylor swift
Emma van Elst
15 Jul 2026, 04:47
AI and background images
Reducio
Juliette Lovelace wrote: 15 Jul 2026, 04:40 This may very well be the last message I post on Juliette as I am waiting to be deactivated, but I felt the need to share my view here in favour of those against the use of AI, as I am 100% against Gen AI in any capacity. We do not need Generative AI. We have never needed it. It steals from humans and destroys the environment. It is not a technology that we ‘need to get used to’, as some have said in this thread. There is a difference between the invention of a phone and the invention of Gen AI, for instance. Anything you can do with AI can already be done elsewhere, all it is doing is stealing this information and putting it on a silver platter for those who don’t care about the consequences to easily digest.
In the case of AI generated backgrounds, plenty of users have already provided alternatives that many seem happy with, yet they are being shut down. I personally do not understand why we are disregarding the idea of volunteering because ‘what if people don’t commit’ when this site is really built on people committing to characters for years, as it runs in real-time. Why do we not trust users who have dedicated seven or more years of their life to this site to dedicate even more time to making the site beautiful, with human art? Especially when they have said they want to.
I would also like to mention the time when Zach did not want to add advertisements to site because it went against the ‘soul of the site’. Does AI generating art not also go against the soul of a site that is built on human creativity? We can’t use AI for our writing because it is a writing site, but writing is art, and so much of this site is comprised of human made code, banners, and aesthetics that adds flavour to the writing. I personally believe you can’t pick and choose when and what you use Gen AI for. If it’s okay for AI images, that is a slippery slope to slowly allowing it to be okay for other things.
My point being, the core of this site is the human community that contributes the writing and the art to it. This is the same community that, from what I’ve seen, are majority against the use of AI backgrounds. I think you are doing a disservice to your player base if you don’t want to at least try the other alternatives (i.e. volunteer art, textured backgrounds, plain backgrounds, royalty free images) before settling for a toggle option that very few seem to want.
I do hope this all makes sense since it’s late for me and I wanted to get this up before heading to bed, but if anyone requires further clarification I am willing to do so (if I’m not deactivated first).
I think that this is a very well crafted argument that sums up all the points that have been made for this side of the argument. I completely agree, and think that, with everything that many people have been agreeing on, which seems to be the fact that we should be given a chance to create human art for this very human site, should not be looked over or dismissed. And I don’t think that it is harsh or disrespectful to say so, as it is a genuinely wonderful thing that so many people are willing to lend their time and art for this site, and it is not impossible.
15 Jul 2026, 10:53
AI and background images
If compromise cannot be made, then I cannot converse in good faith.
There is something about ambition, how it not only propels you but also defines you.
15 Jul 2026, 11:39
AI and background images
If you need to step back, that's understandable, but people have just spent the last two days non-stop trying to find something that works for everyone. I don't believe anyone here is being disrespectful or conversing in bad faith.
a nameless girl in the freshest summer greens, a saint, an angel;
15 Jul 2026, 12:46
AI and background images
"Works for everyone" requires compromise.
There is something about ambition, how it not only propels you but also defines you.
15 Jul 2026, 13:03
AI and background images
Just an addition to what has already been said since I see questions have arisen about the notion of compromising.
The subject of this discussion is regarding implementing AI images as a background. One side does not want to, the other either doesn't mind, or wants to.
A "solution" that has been proposed here and that some call a compromise is to *have* the AI backgrounds, and to put a toggle that allows people not to see it.
This is not a compromise? One side gets what they want (AI backgrounds) and the other doesn't?
A toggle will not change the fact that the AI backgrounds would have been created, and are here. Offering the option to turn a blind eye to it is absolutely not what we're trying to say?
If our argument was solely about the aesthetic of AI images, then yes, it would be a compromise! But it is not.
Which is why I'm confused about why we're apparently unreasonable and refusing to compromise, when all I'm seeing here is that we are not being heard?
I understand it's complicated to reach a middle ground between "no" and "yes", but if we're being called hypocrites for "being okay" with ai images (which, at least on my side, I am not ; it is simply an unreasonable ask to delete every ai image or pfp on the site, even if I'd love to have a zero AI site), then I don't see how you would think ignoring the fact the ai backgrounds are here would be all thumbs up.
I just wanted to say my piece on that part because I feel we're being unfairly represented. Again, this is not meant as an attack, I'm truly sorry if the vehement reaction to this proposal hurt or discouraged Zach, and thus Lear, but I also feel our stance on the matter has always been pretty clear, since the discussions of earlier this year.
Also, and correct me if I'm wrong, I feel that even the "pro ai" people, if a solution that implies pretty backgrounds could be worked without ai, they would choose them over ai? If I'm wrong then apologies, it's how I understood it.
I would just like to recap the solution proposed below :
— do we really need 400 images? forums could be merged, things like OOC forums could be one same image, london areas one same image, same for diagon alley, etc.
ANOTHER IDEA, if we truly need that amount of images for the navigation system (which i get, immersion is fun) is to have "general" drawings / images as a placeholder while people work on narrower drawings (ie. have one general Hogwarts Castle drawing, and then progressively implement the different areas like the Grounds, Greenhouses, etc).
— simpler backgrounds, like textured backgrounds with tiny details
— drawings, that include members of the communities. Lourine has already proposed absolutely incredible WIPs, which I am reposting below :
— photography taken by players
— sites like the met or smithsonian that offer art free of copyrights
- what lorenzo suggested of having personalized wallpapers
I fully understand each of these solutions implies other issues, but we *can* work around them? On the matter of "well what happens if they're banned / leave the site", I'm not extremely familiar on copyrights but I'm fairly sure there is a legal way of passing the rights of the drawing onto Zach. On the matter of "it'll be too long", as I said above we can do it little by little, have around 5 general drawings for now, and then implement them progressively. Etc, etc. Solutions can be worked.
I genuinely do not see any issues that could not be tackled, unless the pro ai people are absolutely set on having ai images. Which I do not understand. Personally.
Anyhow (again), not meant as a personal offense, I just love the site with my entire heart, which is why this subject matters a lot to me. Thank you, mwah to everyone
The subject of this discussion is regarding implementing AI images as a background. One side does not want to, the other either doesn't mind, or wants to.
A "solution" that has been proposed here and that some call a compromise is to *have* the AI backgrounds, and to put a toggle that allows people not to see it.
This is not a compromise? One side gets what they want (AI backgrounds) and the other doesn't?
A toggle will not change the fact that the AI backgrounds would have been created, and are here. Offering the option to turn a blind eye to it is absolutely not what we're trying to say?
If our argument was solely about the aesthetic of AI images, then yes, it would be a compromise! But it is not.
Which is why I'm confused about why we're apparently unreasonable and refusing to compromise, when all I'm seeing here is that we are not being heard?
I understand it's complicated to reach a middle ground between "no" and "yes", but if we're being called hypocrites for "being okay" with ai images (which, at least on my side, I am not ; it is simply an unreasonable ask to delete every ai image or pfp on the site, even if I'd love to have a zero AI site), then I don't see how you would think ignoring the fact the ai backgrounds are here would be all thumbs up.
I just wanted to say my piece on that part because I feel we're being unfairly represented. Again, this is not meant as an attack, I'm truly sorry if the vehement reaction to this proposal hurt or discouraged Zach, and thus Lear, but I also feel our stance on the matter has always been pretty clear, since the discussions of earlier this year.
Also, and correct me if I'm wrong, I feel that even the "pro ai" people, if a solution that implies pretty backgrounds could be worked without ai, they would choose them over ai? If I'm wrong then apologies, it's how I understood it.
I would just like to recap the solution proposed below :
— do we really need 400 images? forums could be merged, things like OOC forums could be one same image, london areas one same image, same for diagon alley, etc.
ANOTHER IDEA, if we truly need that amount of images for the navigation system (which i get, immersion is fun) is to have "general" drawings / images as a placeholder while people work on narrower drawings (ie. have one general Hogwarts Castle drawing, and then progressively implement the different areas like the Grounds, Greenhouses, etc).
— simpler backgrounds, like textured backgrounds with tiny details
— drawings, that include members of the communities. Lourine has already proposed absolutely incredible WIPs, which I am reposting below :
— photography taken by players
— sites like the met or smithsonian that offer art free of copyrights
- what lorenzo suggested of having personalized wallpapers
I fully understand each of these solutions implies other issues, but we *can* work around them? On the matter of "well what happens if they're banned / leave the site", I'm not extremely familiar on copyrights but I'm fairly sure there is a legal way of passing the rights of the drawing onto Zach. On the matter of "it'll be too long", as I said above we can do it little by little, have around 5 general drawings for now, and then implement them progressively. Etc, etc. Solutions can be worked.
I genuinely do not see any issues that could not be tackled, unless the pro ai people are absolutely set on having ai images. Which I do not understand. Personally.
Anyhow (again), not meant as a personal offense, I just love the site with my entire heart, which is why this subject matters a lot to me. Thank you, mwah to everyone
Last edited by Elena Clark on 15 Jul 2026, 13:23, edited 1 time in total.
| ❝ 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐨𝐧-𝐝𝐫𝐮𝐧𝐤, 𝐡𝐚𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝, 𝐩𝐢𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐥.❞ ☘︎ STAFF ACCOUNT ; ᴍᴀʟᴀɪᴋᴀ ᴏᴍᴇɴᴜᴋᴏ |
15 Jul 2026, 13:21
AI and background images
If you were a vegan and wanted a meat free site but we had omnivores that did not mind meat and we offered: OK we will eat meat in the other room. That is not good enough because we are getting what we want, meat and the knowledge that meat is being consumed is unacceptable because you are ethically opposed. So the answer here is to take away my autonomy and inflicting these values on me. I am allowed to have my own experience.
We added a toggle and we can work on adding real images, allowing the community to source them. So we have something for now and offered YEARS of attention and work to move towards removing AI. But replacing an AI image with an image just because it is not AI is not a reasonable expectation. This is absolutely a compromise, I do not want to have to manage people's art for years nor do I want to say "this does not match the site aesthetic," hurting feelings and making people mad. I am looking at a miserable future.
I've made efforts, I have listened, we have made movements - toggle, movement towards player-made images with the expression of real concerns and a realistic timeframe. If that is not recognized, then I honestly have nothing to say.
We added a toggle and we can work on adding real images, allowing the community to source them. So we have something for now and offered YEARS of attention and work to move towards removing AI. But replacing an AI image with an image just because it is not AI is not a reasonable expectation. This is absolutely a compromise, I do not want to have to manage people's art for years nor do I want to say "this does not match the site aesthetic," hurting feelings and making people mad. I am looking at a miserable future.
I've made efforts, I have listened, we have made movements - toggle, movement towards player-made images with the expression of real concerns and a realistic timeframe. If that is not recognized, then I honestly have nothing to say.
There is something about ambition, how it not only propels you but also defines you.
15 Jul 2026, 13:22
AI and background images
Just speaking for myself here, but these are my concerns with volunteers:
— what if the only images submitted are not suitable? They have to be certain dimensions, file type, file size, meet accessibility requirements, and who knows what else. They also have to be of a certain quality. I don’t want to tell anyone their work doesn’t meet a quality standard, personally.
— what if someone who created them leaves or is banned? I don't think we can transfer a copyright without revealing real names? Also we're all in different countries, not sure which copyright laws apply. I think we'd need a lawyer well-versed in international copyright law to tackle that.
— what if people stop submitting? This has happened a lot on Hio with writing projects. We’re all writers, but the artist pool is much smaller.
— who is tracking these images? who is putting in the hours to manage the image volunteers?
— the biggest issue imo: how do we know the images that are submitted aren’t AI? I already spend a lot of time making sure writing isn’t AI on the site, and I find it all the time! A lot of AI art looks AI-ish, but recently, with people who are talented at AI prompting, I’ve seen images and graphics that would be completely indistinguishable from human-made art. I don’t think there is a reliable method to prove something is AI and something is not AI. We had a MARTch event (kinda like inktober but in March) a year or two ago, and AI images were submitted, it was so rough trying to figure them out. If people submit personal photography, that could be AI, too! Where do we draw the line on AI tools integrated into Canva, the Adobe Suite, etc.? I’d rather be transparent and say, “yes these images are AI, they were created with this model.”
(This last point is also why we cannot ban AI images altogether. We have to prove it’s AI and that’s already getting so difficult with writing. The technology is improving at a rapid rate whether we like it or not.)
This is probably the best-looking RP site I’ve ever seen thanks to Zach’s passion for good design. Zach is trying his hardest to be transparent about the large changes he is making. Until alternative images can be sourced from wherever (long, slow process) (and it seems Zach has done a good faith investigation of all the options), the option right now really will be no images or AI images. If the toggle is feasible on a technical level, that may be a good compromise—there are also people who are specifically against the blank background. It seems to be more nuanced than just two camps of anti-AI and pro-AI.
— what if the only images submitted are not suitable? They have to be certain dimensions, file type, file size, meet accessibility requirements, and who knows what else. They also have to be of a certain quality. I don’t want to tell anyone their work doesn’t meet a quality standard, personally.
— what if someone who created them leaves or is banned? I don't think we can transfer a copyright without revealing real names? Also we're all in different countries, not sure which copyright laws apply. I think we'd need a lawyer well-versed in international copyright law to tackle that.
— what if people stop submitting? This has happened a lot on Hio with writing projects. We’re all writers, but the artist pool is much smaller.
— who is tracking these images? who is putting in the hours to manage the image volunteers?
— the biggest issue imo: how do we know the images that are submitted aren’t AI? I already spend a lot of time making sure writing isn’t AI on the site, and I find it all the time! A lot of AI art looks AI-ish, but recently, with people who are talented at AI prompting, I’ve seen images and graphics that would be completely indistinguishable from human-made art. I don’t think there is a reliable method to prove something is AI and something is not AI. We had a MARTch event (kinda like inktober but in March) a year or two ago, and AI images were submitted, it was so rough trying to figure them out. If people submit personal photography, that could be AI, too! Where do we draw the line on AI tools integrated into Canva, the Adobe Suite, etc.? I’d rather be transparent and say, “yes these images are AI, they were created with this model.”
(This last point is also why we cannot ban AI images altogether. We have to prove it’s AI and that’s already getting so difficult with writing. The technology is improving at a rapid rate whether we like it or not.)
This is probably the best-looking RP site I’ve ever seen thanks to Zach’s passion for good design. Zach is trying his hardest to be transparent about the large changes he is making. Until alternative images can be sourced from wherever (long, slow process) (and it seems Zach has done a good faith investigation of all the options), the option right now really will be no images or AI images. If the toggle is feasible on a technical level, that may be a good compromise—there are also people who are specifically against the blank background. It seems to be more nuanced than just two camps of anti-AI and pro-AI.
“This is the dialectic—there is a very short distance between high art and trash, and trash that contains an element of craziness is by this very quality nearer to art.” - Douglas Sirk
also Della Barfield | Quentin Gagné
Emma van Elst
15 Jul 2026, 13:43
AI and background images
Reducio
Solomon Lear wrote: 15 Jul 2026, 13:21 If you were a vegan and wanted a meat free site but we had omnivores that did not mind meat and we offered, OK we will eat meat in the other room. That is not good enough because we are getting what we want, meat and the knowledge that meat is being consumed is basically taking away my autonomy and inflicting your desire on me. I am allowed to have my own experience, you do not have to work on it or look at it.
We added, we can work on adding real images, allowing the community to source them. So we have something for now and offered YEARS of attention and work to move towards removing AI. But replacing an AI image with an image just because it is not AI is not a reasonable expectation.
I've made efforts, I have listened, we have made movements - toggle, movement towards player-made images with the expression of real concerns and a realistic timeframe. If that is not recognized, then I honestly have nothing to say.
The problem is that there isn’t a compromise. It’s just choosing a side because it’s easier and your exhaustion with the constant back and forth is what we feel too. We all want our voices to be heard, just the only problem is that it just sounds like the ‘compromise’ is that the ai is going to be used regardless and there won’t even be a second thought to all of the other solutions listed below because of time. Is this time crunch because of something legal, or because the site can’t possibly go a week without images for a background? It’s managed for a couple days and it seems fine. And if we as a group were to start creating backgrounds, some of the first forums could be done relatively soon, especially if there are multiple artists working. And textured / colored backgrounds. As many people have mentioned before.
Also I think there is a difference between being this and being a vegan. But I suppose in that example, it’s like the carnivores were also chefs. They decide what food gets served at a restaurant, no matter how unethically sourced it is. The omnivores would probably prefer a resturaunt that ethically sourced its food, but they are neutral or just want their food. The vegans are the ones that are trying help the chefs source their food, and are even giving them endless recepies they can use, but they keep getting denied.
It is a matter of it seeming like both sides are stuck on their side, but the people with the power involved aren’t giving us any chance at all. I don’t think there was a point in a thread to get public reactions if it seems like you’re just going to go through with the ai anyway.
You said you couldn’t converse in good faith if there wasn’t talk of a compromise. Another compromise could be if you just try it. I implore you to just try and see that it’s not impossible. And if it is? Then go through with it. That seems a fairer compromise then the chefs refusing any recipes the vegans in give them in order to just keep using the meat, and having those who don’t like it eat it blindfolded.