I value content and human connection about equally on the EA forum. Its a "forum" after all, I think human-to-human forum discussion has far more value than just "sentimentality" We are a group  of people working together to find the best ways to make the world better and put those plans into action. That needs connection and comradery, with perhaps some sentimentality too. I think if a forum is reduced to only "content value" it will cease to be a forum at all in some ways, and will lose significance.

On the content front, If forum posts with human ideas heavily written by AI were better than or as good human posts, I think your argument would be stronger but right now they are not. I challenge you to find one excellent forum post which is over 50% written by AI. It may be there but I doubt it. From a forum norms perspective, don't think there's a lot of value speculating about the future here, we need to adjust to AI reality as it comes. 

I largely agree - I think its similar in many ways to having a ghostwriter

I agree with that, could even be a built in checkbox on posting?

I'm comfortable with something around 30% which is aroundabout where I feel people's distinctive voice begins to fade

I do understand the arguments of the "100%ers" AI can reduce the friction and time to post, can help English second language speakers and can help people express themselves better.

But with AI in between the writer and the reader we lose part of the soul and even beauty in communication. I want to talk with you. I want to hear your voice. Are those your words? Did they come from directly from your mind? Ideas and structure is important, but the words themselves matter at least as much to me - an expression of ourselves and the people we are. What are we without our own words?

If we're happy with discourse without our own words, where does that leave us? Someone's AI bot writes a post, my AI bot replies, then maybe we read it later? This kind communication is less real, and quickly fades into irrelevance. 

I'm happy to pay the time and friction costs to keep our communication pretty close to human-to-human. Its already hard enough to have good discourse on the internet without speaking face-to-face.

I agree 100% that there should be places where AI written discourse is welcomed, personally I would rather that wasn't this forum. 

thanks @Michael St Jules . I agree with those benefits but there's no mention here of potential costs? Maybe you don't think those are significant? 

Its a completely different question but are you happy to receive 100% AI written grant application as well? And would you be happy on your grantmaker end to allow your own AI to review that application or would you insist on reading the whole thing yourself?

Just trying to prod a bit and see how far it goes...

By this poll' definition the AI wrote the whole thing. This poll isn't about style or substance, it is about who actually wrote the words. I think though (disturbingly) most people seem happy to take ownership of AI written words, I don't think that's a big issue.

This question though is asked in the context of AI right now and I don't think AI can actually write nearly as good as a decent writer, even when prompted and guided to write in their voice. So I think your question might be theoretical at this point in some way?

Also you said "Our authorial voice and trust that people put in our words is one of the few things we really have left that makes us human." If we didn't write the words, is it actually our human voice? Even if if it sounds a lot like us?

Yeah the question isn't perfect. It's a personal question which could apply to you or others. It's about what you are comfortable with others and yourself doing in the forum here.