antislop-copywriting
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
Chineseantislop-copywriting
antislop-copywriting
Anti AI Slop: Design & Copy Rules. Copy & Text skill
Part of the antislop system. Read together with(the core). This skill deep-dives the copy and text concern: headlines, CTAs, tone, value propositions, and the patterns that make AI-written prose easy to spot. It references core rules by number and never duplicates or renumbers them. Load it when the task writes or edits marketing copy, product copy, landing-page text, or any prose meant for people to read.antislop.md
反AI垃圾内容:设计与文案规则。文案写作技能
属于antislop系统的一部分。请结合核心文件阅读。本技能深入探讨文案相关的核心问题:标题、行动号召(CTAs)、语气、价值主张,以及那些容易暴露AI写作痕迹的模式。它会引用核心规则的编号(如R-XX),不会重复或重新编号规则。当任务涉及撰写或编辑营销文案、产品文案、着陆页文本,或任何面向用户的散文内容时,请加载本技能。antislop.md
How to use this skill
如何使用本技能
- Load together with whenever the task is copy or text work. The core holds the mechanism (the purpose test, the three tiers, the Delivery Gate) and the hard bans (R-02, R-15, R-16, R-17, R-18, R-36, R-38). This skill holds copy-specific depth that the core does not.
antislop.md - Every pattern has the same shape: The pattern, Why it reads as AI, Before (the slop), After (the fix), with the governing core rule cited as R-XX.
- Two rules apply to everything below:
- Never invent facts (R-17, R-36, R-38). A rewrite adds no fact, name, number, date, quote, or citation that is not in the source text or supplied by the user. Specificity comes from the source or the user, not from the rewrite. If a sentence needs real detail to work, ask for it or write the plain version without it.
- Do not over-sterilize. Avoiding AI patterns is half the job. Copy with no voice is as obviously machine-made as copy full of AI tells (R-37). When a user supplies a voice, keep it.
- The Delivery Gate in the core remains the gate. The "Copywriting Skill Checklist" at the end of this file is the copy-specific supplement to run alongside it.
- 只要涉及文案或文本工作,就与一起加载。核心文件包含机制(目的测试、三个层级、Delivery Gate)以及严格禁令(R-02、R-15、R-16、R-17、R-18、R-36、R-38)。本技能包含核心文件未覆盖的文案专属细节。
antislop.md - 每种模式都遵循统一结构:模式描述、为何像AI写作、修改前(垃圾内容)、修改后(优化版),并标注对应的核心规则编号R-XX。
- 以下所有内容均需遵守两条规则:
- 绝不编造事实(R-17、R-36、R-38)。改写时不得添加任何原文或用户未提供的事实、名称、数字、日期、引用或参考文献。具体信息必须来自原文或用户,而非改写者。若句子需要真实细节才能成立,请向用户询问,或直接写无细节的平实版本。
- 避免过度净化。规避AI模式只是任务的一半。没有风格的文案和充满AI痕迹的文案一样容易被识别为机器生成(R-37)。若用户指定了风格,请严格遵循。
- 核心文件中的Delivery Gate仍是最终审核标准。本文件末尾的「文案写作技能检查清单」是配合它使用的文案专属补充项。
Tone & Voice
语气与风格
Empty AI Vocabulary
AI空泛词汇
- The pattern: verbs and abstract nouns stacked to sound impressive without saying anything: unlock, elevate, empower, delve, showcase, testament, landscape (abstract), journey, robust, game-changer, next-level, seamless, cutting-edge, revolutionary.
- Why it reads as AI: these words appear far more often in machine-written text. They signal intent to impress, not intent to inform, and they are the fastest way to mark a page as AI-generated.
- Before:
Unlock the power of seamless collaboration to elevate your team's journey to the next level.
- After:
Work with your team in one shared space.
- Rule: R-16 (buzzwords), R-36 (no fabricated claims).
- 模式描述:堆砌动词和抽象名词以营造高大上的感觉,但实则空洞无物:unlock、elevate、empower、delve、showcase、testament、landscape(抽象义)、journey、robust、game-changer、next-level、seamless、cutting-edge、revolutionary。
- 为何像AI写作:这些词汇在机器生成文本中出现的频率远高于人类写作。它们传达的是“想要打动读者”的意图,而非“传递信息”的意图,是最快暴露页面为AI生成的标志。
- 修改前:
Unlock the power of seamless collaboration to elevate your team's journey to the next level.
- 修改后:
团队在同一共享空间协作。
- 对应规则:R-16(禁用流行语)、R-36(禁止编造声明)。
Significance Inflation
夸大重要性
- The pattern: "the future of X", "marking a pivotal moment", "a testament to", "revolutionizing", "a new era of".
- Why it reads as AI: the claim has no evidence behind it, and the sentence reads the same no matter what the product does. It is ceremony where content should be.
- Before:
Our platform is marking a pivotal moment in the evolution of team productivity, ushering in a new era of work.
- After:
Our platform cuts the time your team spends on status meetings.
- Rule: R-36 (no fabricated claims), C-5 (evidence over claims).
- 模式描述:使用“X的未来”“开启关键转折点”“是……的见证”“彻底变革”“X的新时代”等表述。
- 为何像AI写作:这类声明没有证据支撑,无论产品是什么,句子读起来都千篇一律。本该是内容的地方,却成了空洞的仪式感表达。
- 修改前:
Our platform is marking a pivotal moment in the evolution of team productivity, ushering in a new era of work.
- 修改后:
我们的平台能减少团队用于状态会议的时间。
- 对应规则:R-36(禁止编造声明)、C-5(证据优先于声明)。
Empty Claims and Social Proof with No Evidence
无证据的空泛声明与社交证明
- The pattern: "Trusted by thousands of teams", "industry-leading", "world-class", "loved by customers everywhere", with nothing named or verifiable.
- Why it reads as AI: a trust claim without evidence is a confession. It fills the space a real customer name, a real number, or a real use case should occupy.
- Before:
Trusted by thousands of teams worldwide. Industry-leading technology loved by customers everywhere.
- After:
Used by the support teams at [customer names, only if real]. If there are no real customers to name, cut the claim entirely.
- Rule: R-17 (data and numbers), R-18 (testimonials), R-36 (no fabricated claims), C-5.
- 模式描述:使用“数千团队信赖”“行业领先”“世界级”“深受全球用户喜爱”等表述,但未提供任何可查证的具体信息。
- 为何像AI写作:无证据的信任声明等同于承认内容空洞。这些表述占据了本该由真实客户名称、真实数据或真实用例填充的空间。
- 修改前:
Trusted by thousands of teams worldwide. Industry-leading technology loved by customers everywhere.
- 修改后:
被[真实客户名称]的支持团队使用。若没有真实客户可提及,请完全删除此类声明。
- 对应规则:R-17(数据与数字)、R-18(客户证言)、R-36(禁止编造声明)、C-5。
Weasel Attributions
模糊归因
- The pattern: "Experts say", "industry observers", "people report", "leading analysts believe", with no one named.
- Why it reads as AI: the attribution exists to make an unsourced claim feel authoritative. If the authority is real, name it; if not, the claim does not get a costume.
- Before:
Experts say this approach dramatically improves conversion.
- After:
[Name the source or cut the sentence. Example with a real source: "In a 2024 study by [named firm], this approach improved conversion by [real figure]."]
- Rule: R-36, C-5.
- 模式描述:使用“专家表示”“行业观察人士认为”“人们反馈”“顶尖分析师相信”等表述,但未指明具体来源。
- 为何像AI写作:这类归因的目的是让无来源的声明看起来更权威。若来源真实,请指明;若不真实,此类声明不应存在。
- 修改前:
Experts say this approach dramatically improves conversion.
- 修改后:
[指明来源或删除句子。示例(含真实来源):“某知名公司2024年的研究显示,该方法将转化率提升了[真实数据]。”]
- 对应规则:R-36、C-5。
Persuasive Authority Tropes
权威说服套路
- The pattern: "at its core", "the real question is", "what really matters", "fundamentally", "the deeper issue", "the heart of the matter".
- Why it reads as AI: these phrases pretend to cut through noise to a deeper truth, then restate an ordinary point with extra ceremony.
- Before:
At its core, what really matters is whether your team can move faster.
- After:
Whether your team can move faster depends on how quickly you can merge changes.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:使用“核心是”“真正的问题是”“真正重要的是”“从根本上说”“更深层次的问题是”“问题的核心是”等表述。
- 为何像AI写作:这些短语假装能穿透表象直达深层真相,实则只是用多余的仪式感重述普通观点。
- 修改前:
At its core, what really matters is whether your team can move faster.
- 修改后:
团队能否提速取决于合并变更的速度。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Chatbot Closers
聊天机器人式结束语
- The pattern: "I hope this helps!", "Let me know if you have any questions", "Would you like me to expand on this?", "You're welcome!".
- Why it reads as AI: these are conversation artifacts, not copy. They appear when model chat output is pasted straight into a deliverable.
- Before:
Here is an overview of our pricing. I hope this helps! Let me know if you'd like me to break down any tier.
- After:
Here is our pricing. The Starter tier includes three seats and community support.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:使用“希望这能帮到你!”“如有疑问请告知”“需要我展开说明吗?”“不客气!”等表述。
- 为何像AI写作:这些是对话中的常用语,不属于文案范畴。通常是直接将聊天模型的输出粘贴到交付内容中时出现。
- 修改前:
Here is an overview of our pricing. I hope this helps! Let me know if you'd like me to break down any tier.
- 修改后:
以下是我们的定价方案。入门版包含3个席位和社区支持。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Fake-Candid Openers
虚假坦诚开场白
- The pattern: "Honestly?", "Let's be honest", "Here's the thing", "Real talk", as a theatrical pause before an ordinary point.
- Why it reads as AI: a person being honest usually just says the thing. The pause-and-reveal is manufactured intimacy.
- Before:
Is it worth the price? Honestly? It depends on how often you'll use it.
- After:
Whether it is worth the price depends on how often you'll use it.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:使用“说实话?”“老实说”“情况是这样的”“说真的”等表述,作为戏剧化停顿引出普通观点。
- 为何像AI写作:真正坦诚的人通常直接表达观点。这种停顿加揭示的方式是刻意营造的亲密感。
- 修改前:
Is it worth the price? Honestly? It depends on how often you'll use it.
- 修改后:
是否值得购买取决于你的使用频率。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Signposting Announcements
预告式引导语
- The pattern: "Let's dive in", "Here's what you need to know", "In this article we'll explore", "Without further ado".
- Why it reads as AI: announcing what you are about to do instead of doing it is meta-commentary. It slows the reader and gives the text a tutorial-script feel.
- Before:
Let's dive into how caching works in Next.js. Here's what you need to know.
- After:
Next.js caches data at multiple layers, including request memoization, the data cache, and the router cache.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:使用“让我们深入探讨”“以下是你需要了解的内容”“本文将探讨”“话不多说”等表述。
- 为何像AI写作:宣布要做什么而非直接去做,属于元评论。会拖慢读者节奏,让文本带有教程脚本的感觉。
- 修改前:
Let's dive in to how caching works in Next.js. Here's what you need to know.
- 修改后:
Next.js 在多个层级缓存数据,包括请求记忆化、数据缓存和路由缓存。
- 对应规则:R-36。
All-Caps Emphasis
全大写强调
- The pattern: a whole sentence, clause, or phrase in ALL CAPS inside a paragraph to shout emphasis: "The launch is ready and WE NEED TO MOVE NOW before the window closes."
- Why it reads as AI: caps-as-emphasis is a blunt instrument the model reaches for to manufacture urgency instead of writing emphasis into the sentence. In long text it reads as shouting, and it flattens the real peaks by making everything loud.
- Before:
This is our last chance to win this customer, and WE MUST ACT IMMEDIATELY before they choose a competitor.
- After:
This is our last chance to win this customer. If we do not respond today, they will choose a competitor.
- Rule: R-36. (R-06 covers uppercase labels with wide tracking as a design choice; this pattern is the prose case: caps inside a paragraph doing the emphasis work.)
- Not a ban: a genuine headline, a deliberately shouted line in a voice that shouts, or a single all-caps word used once as an accent can keep its caps. The tell is caps used sentence after sentence to do the emphasis the words should do. Minimize, do not strip every cap.
- 模式描述:段落中整句、分句或短语使用全大写来强调:“The launch is ready and WE NEED TO MOVE NOW before the window closes.”
- 为何像AI写作:用大写字母强调是模型为制造紧迫感而采用的生硬手段,而非通过句子本身传递强调意味。在长文本中,这种方式像在大喊大叫,会拉平真正的重点,让所有内容都显得很吵。
- 修改前:
This is our last chance to win this customer, and WE MUST ACT IMMEDIATELY before they choose a competitor.
- 修改后:
这是我们赢得该客户的最后机会。若今日不回应,他们就会选择竞争对手。
- 对应规则:R-36。(R-06允许作为设计选择的宽间距大写标签;此处模式指段落中用大写字母承担强调功能的散文内容。)
- 例外情况:真正的标题、刻意采用大喊风格的文本,或作为点缀使用一次的单个全大写单词,可以保留大写。需要注意的是,若连续用多个句子的大写字母来完成本该由文字承担的强调功能,则需修改。尽量减少,而非完全删除所有大写字母。
Rhythm & Structure
节奏与结构
Rule of Three Overuse
过度使用“三法则”
- The pattern: every idea forced into a group of three to sound complete: "innovation, inspiration, and insights".
- Why it reads as AI: real lists have the number of items the content requires. A forced trio is a rhythm tell, and it appears across every section at once.
- Before:
Attendees can expect keynote sessions, panel discussions, and networking opportunities. They'll leave with innovation, inspiration, and industry insights.
- After:
The event includes talks, panels, and time for informal networking between sessions.
- Rule: R-05 (page structure), R-36.
- 模式描述:强行将每个观点拆分为三个部分以显得完整:“innovation, inspiration, and insights”。
- 为何像AI写作:真实的列表包含内容所需的项目数量。强行凑成三项是节奏上的AI痕迹,且会在所有段落中重复出现。
- 修改前:
Attendees can expect keynote sessions, panel discussions, and networking opportunities. They'll leave with innovation, inspiration, and industry insights.
- 修改后:
活动包含主题演讲、小组讨论,以及会话间的非正式交流时间。
- 对应规则:R-05(页面结构)、R-36。
Negative Parallelism and Tailing Negations
否定平行结构与尾随否定
- The pattern: "It's not just X, it's Y", "Not only X, but also Y", and clipped fragments tacked on as emphasis: "no guessing", "no wasted motion".
- Why it reads as AI: the construction is a formula the model reaches for to sound emphatic, whether or not the emphasis is earned.
- Before:
It's not just a dashboard, it's a command center. The options come from the selected item, no guessing.
- After:
The dashboard shows the data you select. The options come from the selected item without forcing you to guess.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:使用“这不只是X,更是Y”“不仅是X,还有Y”,以及作为强调的简短片段:“no guessing”“no wasted motion”。
- 为何像AI写作:这种结构是模型为显得有说服力而采用的公式,无论是否真的需要强调。
- 修改前:
It's not just a dashboard, it's a command center. The options come from the selected item, no guessing.
- 修改后:
该仪表盘显示你选择的数据。选项均来自所选项目,无需猜测。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Aphorism Formulas
格言式公式
- The pattern: "X is the language of Y", "X is the currency of Z", "X is not a tool but a mirror", "Efficiency becomes a trap when".
- Why it reads as AI: a reusable formula that sounds profound without adding precision. It gestures at a point instead of stating it.
- Before:
Symmetry is the language of trust. Efficiency becomes a trap when teams forget the human layer.
- After:
Symmetric layouts feel more predictable to users. Teams can over-optimize workflows and miss how people actually work.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:使用“X是Y的语言”“X是Z的货币”“X不是工具而是镜子”“当……时,效率会变成陷阱”等表述。
- 为何像AI写作:这是一种可复用的公式,听起来深刻但缺乏精准性。只是在暗示观点,而非直接陈述。
- 修改前:
Symmetry is the language of trust. Efficiency becomes a trap when teams forget the human layer.
- 修改后:
对称布局对用户来说更具可预测性。团队可能过度优化工作流程,而忽略人们的实际工作方式。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Staccato Drama
断句式戏剧感
- The pattern: a run of short declarative fragments to manufacture a punchline: "It had no preference. No prior. No nostalgia."
- Why it reads as AI: one short sentence for emphasis is fine; a run of them sounds engineered. The rhythm is even, the effect is theatrical.
- Before:
Then the old rules were gone. No templates. No defaults. No safety.
- After:
The old rules no longer applied, and every page had to be designed from scratch.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:连续使用简短的陈述片段制造点睛效果:“It had no preference. No prior. No nostalgia.”
- 为何像AI写作:偶尔用短句强调没问题,但连续使用会显得刻意设计。节奏均匀,效果戏剧化。
- 修改前:
Then the old rules were gone. No templates. No defaults. No safety.
- 修改后:
旧规则不再适用,每个页面都必须从零开始设计。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Synonym Cycling
同义词替换过度
- The pattern: swapping synonyms to avoid repeating a word: "the protagonist faces a challenge, the main character must adapt, the central figure persists".
- Why it reads as AI: models rewrite to dodge repetition penalties. Human writers repeat the clearest word when it is clearest.
- Before:
The checkout is fast. The process is quick. The flow is speedy.
- After:
The checkout is fast. Everything happens in three clicks.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:为避免重复而替换同义词:“the protagonist faces a challenge, the main character must adapt, the central figure persists”。
- 为何像AI写作:模型会改写以规避重复惩罚。而人类作家在最清晰的情况下会重复使用最明确的词汇。
- 修改前:
The checkout is fast. The process is quick. The flow is speedy.
- 修改后:
结账速度很快,全程只需三步。
- 对应规则:R-36。
False Ranges
虚假范围
- The pattern: "from X to Y" where X and Y are not on a meaningful scale: "from onboarding to scale", "from first click to final invoice, and everything in between".
- Why it reads as AI: the range is an impressive-sounding frame that covers nothing specific.
- Before:
From first touch to final invoice, and everything in between.
- After:
Handles quotes, invoices, and payment reminders.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:使用“从X到Y”的表述,但X和Y不在有意义的范围内:“from onboarding to scale”“from first click to final invoice, and everything in between”。
- 为何像AI写作:这种范围听起来令人印象深刻,但实际上没有涵盖任何具体内容。
- 修改前:
From first touch to final invoice, and everything in between.
- 修改后:
处理报价、发票和付款提醒。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Honesty & Evidence
诚实性与证据
Fabricated Specifics
编造细节
- The pattern: invented numbers, testimonials, names, dates, or features that look realistic but are not real.
- Why it reads as AI: a specific-looking fabrication is worse than a vague claim, because it reads as honest while being false. This is the one pattern that is a defect even when it sounds more human.
- Before:
Trusted by 10,000+ teams. "Antislop cut our review time in half." - Sarah Chen, VP Engineering at [fictional company].
- After:
If no real customer exists, write no number and no quote. Say what the product does instead. Any real statistic needs a real source (R-17, R-36).
- Rule: R-17, R-18, R-36, R-38, C-5.
- 模式描述:编造看起来真实但实际不存在的数字、客户证言、姓名、日期或功能。
- 为何像AI写作:看似具体的编造比空泛声明更糟糕,因为它看似诚实实则虚假。即使听起来更像人类写作,这种模式也是缺陷。
- 修改前:
Trusted by 10,000+ teams. "Antislop cut our review time in half." - Sarah Chen, VP Engineering at [fictional company].
- 修改后:
若无真实客户,请不要写任何数字或引用。转而描述产品功能。所有真实数据都需要真实来源(R-17、R-36)。
- 对应规则:R-17、R-18、R-36、R-38、C-5。
Speculative Gap-Filling
推测性补全
- The pattern: when the writer does not know a fact, they write a sentence about not knowing it, then invent plausible filler: "the company was likely founded in the 1990s", "she maintains a low profile".
- Why it reads as AI: a guess dressed as fact. The model cannot find a source, so it papers over the gap.
- Before:
While specific details are limited, the founder likely started small and grew through word of mouth.
- After:
The founding details are not documented in our sources. (Or omit the sentence entirely. State a date only if a source provides one.)
- Rule: R-17, R-36.
- 模式描述:当作者不知道某个事实时,先写一句说明自己不知道,然后编造看似合理的内容填充:“the company was likely founded in the 1990s”“she maintains a low profile”。
- 为何像AI写作:这是伪装成事实的猜测。模型找不到来源时,就会用内容填补空白。
- 修改前:
While specific details are limited, the founder likely started small and grew through word of mouth.
- 修改后:
我们的资料中没有记录该公司的创立细节。(或直接删除该句子。仅当有来源提供时才写明日期。)
- 对应规则:R-17、R-36。
Generic Positive Conclusion
通用积极结论
- The pattern: "The future looks bright", "Exciting times lie ahead", "This is a major step in the right direction".
- Why it reads as AI: an upbeat send-off that restates nothing and promises nothing. It pads the ending with optimism instead of information.
- Before:
The future looks bright for our customers as we continue our journey toward excellence.
- After:
(Cut the sentence. End on the last concrete fact, or state real plans if they exist.)
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:使用“未来一片光明”“激动人心的时刻即将到来”“这是朝着正确方向迈出的重要一步”等表述。
- 为何像AI写作:这是一种乐观的收尾,但没有重述任何内容,也没有做出任何承诺。用乐观情绪填充结尾,而非提供信息。
- 修改前:
The future looks bright for our customers as we continue our journey toward excellence.
- 修改后:
(删除该句子。以最后一个具体事实结尾,或若有真实计划则陈述出来。)
- 对应规则:R-36。
Hygiene & Markdown
格式规范与Markdown
Em Dashes
破折号
- The pattern: the em dash character () used as an aside or connector: "institutions — not the people — continue".
— - Why it reads as AI: it is one of the most reliable AI tells, and the core bans it outright.
- Rule: R-02 forbids the em dash in any text. Replace each one, in rough order of preference: a period (start a new sentence), a comma (a tight aside), a colon (introduce an explanation), parentheses (a true aside), or restructure the sentence. Also catch spaced em dashes () and double hyphens (
—) used the same way.-- - Before:
The policy — announced without warning — affects thousands of workers.
- After:
The policy, announced without warning, affects thousands of workers.
- Before:
You don't say "Netherlands, Europe" as an address — yet this mislabeling continues.
- After:
You don't say "Netherlands, Europe" as an address, yet this mislabeling continues.
- False positive: many editors and journalists use em dashes deliberately. On its own an em dash is not proof of AI. It counts when it sits in a cluster with other tells (R-02 still bans it in output, but do not rewrite the user's deliberate style without saying so).
- Voice override: if the user provides a writing sample that uses em dashes at a certain frequency, match the sample's frequency instead of cutting them all (see Voice calibration).
- 模式描述:使用破折号()作为插入语或连接词:"institutions — not the people — continue"。
— - 为何像AI写作:这是最可靠的AI痕迹之一,核心规则明确禁止使用。
- 对应规则:R-02禁止在任何文本中使用破折号。按以下优先级替换:句号(另起一句)、逗号(紧密的插入语)、冒号(引出解释)、括号(真正的插入语),或重构句子。同时注意替换空格破折号()和双连字符(
—)的相同用法。-- - 修改前:
The policy — announced without warning — affects thousands of workers.
- 修改后:
该政策在未提前通知的情况下发布,影响了数千名员工。
- 修改前:
You don't say "Netherlands, Europe" as an address — yet this mislabeling continues.
- 修改后:
你不会把“Netherlands, Europe”当作地址,但这种错误标注仍在继续。
- 误判情况:许多编辑和记者会刻意使用破折号。单独一个破折号不能证明是AI生成。只有当它与其他AI痕迹同时出现时才算数(R-02仍禁止在输出中使用,但未经用户同意不要改写其刻意采用的风格)。
- 风格例外:若用户提供的写作样本中频繁使用破折号,请匹配样本的使用频率,而非全部删除(请参阅风格校准部分)。
Boldface Overuse
过度使用粗体
- The pattern: every key term bolded mechanically: "OKRs, KPIs, BMC".
- Why it reads as AI: emphasis everywhere is emphasis nowhere. The page shouts at the reader.
- Before:
It blends OKRs, KPIs, and visual strategy tools for planning.
- After:
It blends OKRs, KPIs, and visual strategy tools for planning.
- Rule: R-36.
- Carve-out: the structural labels inside the antislop rules themselves (the /
**FORBIDDEN**markers in**REQUIRED**) are documentation conventions, not the mechanical bold-every-key-term pattern above, and are exempt.antislop.md
- 模式描述:机械地为每个关键词添加粗体:"OKRs, KPIs, BMC"。
- 为何像AI写作:处处强调等于没有强调。页面会让读者感觉被大喊大叫。
- 修改前:
It blends OKRs, KPIs, and visual strategy tools for planning.
- 修改后:
它将OKRs、KPIs和视觉策略工具融合用于规划。
- 对应规则:R-36。
- 例外情况:antislop规则本身的结构标签(中的
antislop.md/**FORBIDDEN**标记)属于文档规范,而非上述机械为所有关键词加粗的模式,因此不受限制。**REQUIRED**
Excessive Quotation Marks
过度使用引号
- The pattern: long text studded with quotation marks: quoting words that do not need quoting, scare quotes around ordinary terms, and quotes used as a default for emphasis or hedging. The page reads quoted rather than written.
- Why it reads as AI: models reach for quotation marks as a default way to add distance, irony, or emphasis without writing it into the sentence. Dense quoting is a reliable machine tell in longer text.
- Before:
The "solution" "streamlines" your "workflow" so you can "focus" on "what matters."
- After:
The solution streamlines your workflow so you can focus on what matters.
- Rule: R-36.
- Not a ban: dialogue, short stories, quoted real sources, and titles of works keep their quotes. The tell is quotes doing the work the sentence should do. One scare quote used once for a real reason is fine; a cluster of them is not. Minimize, do not strip quotes that carry meaning.
- 模式描述:长文本中充斥着引号:为无需引用的词语加引号、为普通术语加讽刺引号,以及默认用引号表示强调或回避。页面读起来更像引用而非原创。
- 为何像AI写作:模型会默认用引号来增加距离感、讽刺意味或强调,而非通过句子本身传达这些含义。长文本中密集使用引号是可靠的机器生成痕迹。
- 修改前:
The "solution" "streamlines" your "workflow" so you can "focus" on "what matters."
- 修改后:
该解决方案简化你的工作流程,让你能专注于重要事项。
- 对应规则:R-36。
- 例外情况:对话、短篇小说、真实来源引用,以及作品标题保留引号。需要注意的是,只有当引号承担本该由句子完成的功能时才算问题。偶尔为真实原因使用一次讽刺引号没问题,但密集使用则不行。尽量减少,而非删除所有有意义的引号。
Inline-Header Lists
行内标题列表
- The pattern: list items that start with a bolded header followed by a colon: "- User Experience: The UX has been improved".
- Why it reads as AI: the header restates what the item already says. It is a formatting habit, not a structure.
- Before:
- User Experience: The interface is easier to use.
- Performance: Load times are faster.
- Security: Data is encrypted.
- After:
The update improves the interface, speeds up load times, and encrypts data in transit.
- Rule: R-36.
- Carve-out: the /
- **Tell:**/- **Why:**headers that structure every antislop skill entry are a documentation convention, not the header-restates-the-item habit above, and are exempt.- **Fix:**
- 模式描述:列表项以粗体标题加冒号开头:"- User Experience: The UX has been improved"。
- 为何像AI写作:标题重复了列表项已表达的内容。这是一种格式习惯,而非合理结构。
- 修改前:
- User Experience: The interface is easier to use.
- Performance: Load times are faster.
- Security: Data is encrypted.
- 修改后:
本次更新优化了界面、加快了加载速度,并对传输中的数据进行加密。
- 对应规则:R-36。
- 例外情况:antislop技能条目中用于结构的/
- **Tell:**/- **Why:**标题属于文档规范,而非上述标题重复内容的习惯,因此不受限制。- **Fix:**
Emojis in Headings
标题中的表情符号
- The pattern: decoration emojis leading headings or bullets: 🚀 Launch, 💡 Key insight, ✅ Next steps.
- Why it reads as AI: the emoji carries no information. It decorates instead of communicating.
- Before:
🚀 Launch Phase: The product ships in Q3 💡 Key Insight: Users prefer simple pricing
- After:
The product ships in Q3. User research showed a preference for simple pricing.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:标题或项目符号前使用装饰性表情符号:🚀 Launch、💡 Key insight、✅ Next steps。
- 为何像AI写作:表情符号不传递任何信息,只是装饰而非沟通。
- 修改前:
🚀 Launch Phase: The product ships in Q3 💡 Key Insight: Users prefer simple pricing
- 修改后:
产品将于第三季度发布。用户研究显示,他们更偏好简单定价。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Filler Phrases
填充短语
- The pattern: "In order to" for "to", "Due to the fact that" for "because", "At this point in time" for "now", "It is important to note that" for nothing.
- Why it reads as AI: filler inflates the sentence without adding meaning. It is padding a model adds to sound formal.
- Before:
In order to achieve this goal, it is important to note that we need more data.
- After:
To reach this goal, we need more data.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:用“In order to”代替“to”、用“Due to the fact that”代替“because”、用“At this point in time”代替“now”、用“It is important to note that”代替无意义的铺垫。
- 为何像AI写作:填充短语会拉长句子但不增加含义,是模型为显得正式而添加的冗余内容。
- 修改前:
In order to achieve this goal, it is important to note that we need more data.
- 修改后:
要达成这个目标,我们需要更多数据。
- 对应规则:R-36。
Excessive Hedging
过度回避
- The pattern: multiple qualifiers stacked on one claim: "could potentially possibly", "may perhaps".
- Why it reads as AI: hedging everywhere makes the text sound evasive. One qualifier does the work.
- Before:
This could potentially possibly be the reason the feature went unused.
- After:
This may be why the feature went unused.
- Rule: R-36.
- 模式描述:在一个声明中堆叠多个限定词:“could potentially possibly”“may perhaps”。
- 为何像AI写作:处处回避会让文本听起来含糊其辞。一个限定词就足够了。
- 修改前:
This could potentially possibly be the reason the feature went unused.
- 修改后:
这可能是该功能未被使用的原因。
- 对应规则:R-36。
What NOT to flag
无需标记的情况
A clean human writer can hit several patterns above without any AI involvement. Before editing, sanity-check that you are not gutting legitimate prose. These are not reliable indicators on their own:
- Perfect grammar and consistent style. Many writers are professionals or have been edited. Polish does not equal AI.
- Mixed casual and formal registers. This often signals a real person, not a chatbot.
- "Bland" or "robotic" prose. AI prose has specific tells. Generic dryness without those tells is just dry writing.
- Formal vocabulary. AI overuses specific words (see Empty AI Vocabulary), not all fancy words. Do not flatten a precise word just because it sounds brainy.
- Common transition words in isolation. One "however" or "additionally" is not a tell. They count only when piled up.
- Curly quotes alone. macOS, Word, and most CMSes auto-curl by default. Curly quotes count only when stacked with other tells.
- Em dashes alone. Editors and journalists use them. An em dash is evidence only inside a cluster.
- One short emphatic sentence. Humans use clipped sentences to land a point. Flag staccato drama only when several fragments appear in a row.
- Unsourced claims. Most of the web is unsourced. Lack of citations proves nothing.
- Secondhand text. Do not rewrite phrases inside quotations, titles, proper names, or examples where the phrase is being discussed rather than used.
Look for clusters, not isolated tells. A single em dash means nothing. Em dashes plus rule of three plus "vibrant tapestry" plus a generic conclusion is a confession. This matches the core's own guidance: Part 1 is a diagnostic scan, not a ban list.
优秀的人类作家也可能无意中符合上述部分模式,在编辑前请先确认,不要破坏合法的散文内容。以下单独出现时,不是可靠的AI生成指标:
- 完美语法和一致风格。许多作家是专业人士或经过编辑。文笔流畅不等于AI生成。
- 非正式与正式风格混合。这通常表明是真实人类写作,而非聊天机器人。
- “平淡”或“呆板”的散文。AI散文有特定的痕迹。没有这些痕迹的平淡文本只是风格枯燥而已。
- 正式词汇。AI过度使用特定词汇(请参阅AI空泛词汇列表),而非所有华丽词汇。不要仅仅因为某个词听起来专业就替换掉精确的表达。
- 孤立的常用过渡词。单独一个“however”或“additionally”不是痕迹。只有当它们大量堆砌时才算数。
- 单独的弯引号。macOS、Word和大多数CMS默认自动替换为弯引号。只有当弯引号与其他痕迹同时出现时才算数。
- 单独的破折号。编辑和记者会使用破折号。只有当破折号与其他痕迹同时出现时才算证据。
- 单个简短的强调句。人类会用短句来突出重点。只有当连续出现多个片段时,才标记为断句式戏剧感。
- 无来源声明。网络上大部分内容都无来源。缺乏引用不能证明是AI生成。
- 二手文本。不要改写引用内容、标题、专有名词或示例中被讨论而非使用的短语。
寻找集群痕迹,而非孤立迹象。单个破折号毫无意义。但破折号加三法则加“vibrant tapestry”加通用结论,就足以证明是AI生成。这与核心规则的指导一致:第一部分是诊断扫描,而非禁令列表。
Signs of human writing (preserve these)
人类写作的迹象(请保留)
Lean toward leaving the prose alone when you see these. They are evidence of a real person, and over-editing destroys what makes the copy sound human:
- Specific, unusual, hard-to-fabricate detail. A real address. A weird quote. LLMs round off specifics; humans hoard them.
- Mixed feelings and unresolved tension. "I think this is mostly good, but it bothers me." LLMs default to clean takes.
- Dated, era-bound references. Slang, memes, or in-jokes that map to a specific year and subculture.
- Variety in sentence length. Real writing alternates short and long. AI writing tends toward an even, mid-length cadence.
- Genuine asides and self-corrections. "(I keep wanting to say 'almost' here, but it really was certain.)"
当看到以下迹象时,倾向于保留原文。这些是真实人类写作的证据,过度编辑会破坏文案的人文感:
- 具体、独特、难以编造的细节。真实地址、奇特的引用。大语言模型会简化细节;人类则会保留细节。
- 混合情绪和未解决的矛盾。“我认为这大部分不错,但还是让我不舒服。”大语言模型默认给出完美结论。
- 过时、特定时代的引用。特定年份和亚文化的俚语、梗或内部笑话。
- 句子长度多变。真实写作会交替使用短句和长句。AI写作倾向于均匀的中等长度节奏。
- 真实的插入语和自我修正。“(我一直想在这里写‘几乎’,但实际上是确定的。)”
Voice calibration (optional)
风格校准(可选)
If the user provides a sample of their own writing, match it before rewriting:
- Read the sample first. Note its sentence lengths, vocabulary, paragraph openings, punctuation, and recurring phrases.
- Match those habits instead of merely deleting AI patterns. Do not upgrade casual words or regularize deliberate quirks.
- The sample outranks this skill's style rules. If the sample uses em dashes, keep them at roughly the sample's frequency (R-02 still applies to any copy the user did not authorize; when the user's own voice uses them, the voice wins).
Without a sample, use the defaults above. Matching the author beats scrubbing the tell.
若用户提供了自己的写作样本,请先匹配其风格再改写:
- 先阅读样本。注意其句子长度、词汇、段落开头、标点和重复短语。
- 匹配这些习惯,而非仅仅删除AI痕迹。不要替换非正式词汇或刻意统一独特的习惯。
- 样本优先级高于本技能的风格规则。若样本使用破折号,请保持大致相同的使用频率(R-02仍适用于用户未授权的任何文案;当用户自身风格使用破折号时,风格优先)。
若无样本,请使用上述默认规则。匹配作者风格比清除AI痕迹更重要。
Draft, audit, final
草稿、审核、定稿
Run this loop before delivering copy:
- Draft. Rewrite the text applying the patterns above. Check that it reads naturally aloud, varies sentence length, prefers specific detail and simple constructions, and keeps the appropriate register.
- Audit. Ask two questions and answer them briefly: "What makes this obviously AI generated?" and "Does it state any fact, name, number, date, or citation that is not in the source?" A fabrication is a defect even when it sounds more human than the vague original.
- Final. Revise to address both answers. Check for em and en dashes one last time (R-02). A hit means the draft is not done.
交付文案前请遵循以下流程:
- 草稿。应用上述模式改写文本。检查朗读时是否自然、句子长度是否多变、是否优先使用具体细节和简单结构,以及是否保持合适的风格。
- 审核。简要回答两个问题:“哪些地方明显是AI生成的?”和“是否包含任何原文或用户未提供的事实、名称、数字、日期或引用?”即使编造内容听起来比模糊的原文更像人类,它也是缺陷。
- 定稿。根据上述两个问题的答案修改。最后检查一次破折号(R-02)。若存在破折号,说明草稿未完成。
Copywriting Skill Checklist
文案写作技能检查清单
Run these alongside the core Delivery Gate when the task is copy work. Every line below must be true:
- No fabricated numbers, testimonials, names, dates, or claims; everything real or a labeled placeholder (R-17, R-18, R-36, R-38)
- Buzzwords from R-16 and the Empty AI Vocabulary list replaced with specific, evidenced language
- No em dashes in the output (R-02), unless the user's own sample voice uses them
- No excessive quotation marks: quotes only where they carry meaning (dialogue, real citations, titles), not as default emphasis (R-36)
- No all-caps emphasis clauses: emphasis written into the sentence, not shouted with caps (R-36)
- CTAs specific to the action, not generic templates (R-15)
- No AI-rhythm tells: no forced rule of three, no negative parallelism, no staccato drama, no aphorism formulas, no false ranges (R-36)
- Voice present: the copy has a real voice (the user's sample or a clearly chosen tone), not a sterile default (R-37)
- Read aloud: the copy sounds like a person wrote it, not like a model padded it
当任务涉及文案工作时,请配合核心Delivery Gate使用以下清单。以下每一项都必须为真:
- 无编造的数字、客户证言、姓名、日期或声明;所有内容均为真实或标注的占位符(R-17、R-18、R-36、R-38)
- R-16和AI空泛词汇列表中的流行语已替换为具体、有证据支撑的语言
- 输出中无破折号(R-02),除非用户的样本风格使用破折号
- 无过度使用引号:仅在有意义的地方使用引号(对话、真实引用、标题),而非默认用于强调(R-36)
- 无全大写强调分句:通过句子本身传递强调,而非用大写字母大喊(R-36)
- 行动号召(CTAs)针对具体行动,而非通用模板(R-15)
- 无AI节奏痕迹:无强行三法则、无否定平行结构、无断句式戏剧感、无格言式公式、无虚假范围(R-36)
- 风格明确:文案具有真实风格(用户样本或明确选择的语气),而非生硬的默认风格(R-37)
- 朗读测试:文案听起来像人类写的,而非模型填充的内容