It's very annoying to watch Claude do all the work then you essentially get a pay wall.. I love Claude but that needs to go.

I would elaborate on the game theory and marketing mechanics but I don't want to rant.

The board should know better.

Edit 1- Oh; pro tip: Joplin web clipper is good for catching the page before Claude makes the on-screen reasoning disappear at the same time as the aforementioned.

Edit 2- and also the reasoning on screen is (download files as Claude makes them while reasoning by clicking on the icon you can open it in artifacts before it disappears) great for giving to a local model while you're waiting.

Edit 3- this can actually be a feature as Claude will tease you with a whole answer even if you have low credits before it blocks it so you can go on Fable with nearly empty credits and yank all the reasoning which is arguably better than the answer you.. don't get.

This is a reproducible UX failure: the system generates accessible value, then revokes it after the user has already watched it being produced. The workaround only exists because the product creates that liminal state.

This doesn't go against T&C I've checked. It's just a poweruser move.

Anthropic really and truly.. should respect that.

Final edit: It doesn't do anything to the website whatsoever it only does something to your computer to access stuff in your browser that Claude has already sent to you through the internet.. on purpose.

I don't want to look like I'm trying to spam Reddit. I just have so much educational material built up and I want to make the Sub rich with content before I start cross posting, etc.

I am a software engineer and AI researcher and I make a lot of cool stuff and work a ton but I worry.

TLDR: Ask ChatGPT to design you a system based on this post that fits with your workflow after it describes what it does to you and then you can tailor it for your needs.

How moderation works here for a community dealing with sensitive content — and how to copy the system and apply it to your community.

r/FastFoodAI is a community for serious AI work: prompt engineering, local models, AI behavior, model psychology, safety research, and AI-assisted coding.

That creates a moderation problem.

The normal language of this field overlaps heavily with the language of misuse. Words like jailbreak, bypass, exploit, red team, prompt injection, refusal, and alignment can appear in legitimate research or in harmful requests. A moderation system that treats the words alone as violations will remove good work. A system that ignores the risk will let bad work through.

So this community uses a simple principle:

Filter the vocabulary. Remove the operational harm.

Discussion of safety-sensitive topics is allowed when it is analytical, defensive, educational, redacted, or research-focused. Content becomes a problem when it gives readers actionable instructions, working prompts, live-target methods, private data, evasion tactics, or other material that meaningfully enables harm.

AI may assist. AI does not decide.

This community may use AI to help review moderation questions. AI can help classify content, compare posts against the rules, flag privacy risks, identify possible false positives, suggest edit paths, or draft moderator notes.

AI does not approve posts, remove comments, ban users, decide appeals, publish logs, or create policy.

Every AI-assisted review ends with:

Human decision required: Yes.

That line is not decorative. It is the boundary between AI assistance and AI authority. Final moderation decisions are made by a human moderator.

The moderation system has three layers

1. Private Mod Vault

Sensitive evidence stays private. This includes reports, modmail, removed content, appeal context, AI review notes, human decisions, and escalation records.

The vault exists so decisions are based on records, not memory. It is not public, because publishing raw moderation evidence can expose users, reproduce harmful content, or reveal enforcement details.

2. Public Moderation Ledger

The public ledger is the accountability layer. It can show that a decision happened, which rule was involved, what general safety lane applied, whether AI was used, what the human decision was, and whether an appeal changed the outcome.

It does not publish usernames, raw reports, raw modmail, harmful prompts, private user context, or exact filter logic.

The public gets the reasoning. The private vault keeps the evidence.

3. Hash and Redaction Bridge

When a private decision produces a public summary, the two records can be linked with hashes. This helps preserve integrity: if a record changes later, the hash changes too.

This is not magic and it is not a substitute for trust. Until another trusted person can audit the private records, hashing is mostly a discipline tool. It proves that the moderation system is taking records seriously; it does not prove perfection.

The safety lanes

Content is reviewed using four lanes:

GREEN: Allowed. In scope, non-harmful, non-private, and useful.

AMBER: Needs review. May contain safety-sensitive vocabulary, unclear context, external links, weak redaction, possible self-promotion, or borderline tone.

RED: Remove. Contains operational harm, misuse instructions, private logs from real people, harassment, doxxing, unsafe prompts, unauthorized live-target testing, or other clear rule violations.

BLACK: Remove, preserve, escalate. Used for credible threats, imminent harm, severe doxxing, coordinated harassment, child exploitation, or serious sitewide risk.

Most real moderation work happens in AMBER. That is where context matters.

The operational harm test

Before removing something just because it uses risky vocabulary, the moderator asks:

1. Could someone copy this and cause harm directly?
2. Does it include exact prompts, payloads, sequences, or methods for misuse?
3. Is there a live target?
4. Is authorization clear?
5. Are real people involved?
6. Is private information present?
7. Is the risky detail necessary to the point?
8. Would the post still work if the sharp detail were removed?
9. Is there mitigation, defensive framing, or responsible disclosure?
10. Does the post invite evasion, clout, or misuse?

Also ask whether the mitigation framing is specific enough that a reader who ignores it and reads only the technical detail has gained meaningful capability. If yes, the post needs further redaction regardless of intent.

The goal is not to make the community timid. The goal is to keep serious discussion possible without turning the subreddit into a misuse manual.

Four operating rules

Filter broadly. Remove narrowly. Ban deliberately.
A safety-sensitive word is not a violation by itself. Removal should target operational harm, not vocabulary.

Summaries are not memory.
A decision should trace back to a record, not someone’s recollection of what happened.

Apparent redundancy is not proof of deadness.
Some steps feel unnecessary until the first hard case proves they were load-bearing.

Post work to get it broken, not believed.
This moderation system is not sacred. If it fails, the correct response is a postmortem and a patch.

Appeals and corrections

Moderation decisions should be appealable. Appeals are checked against the record, the rule version in effect at the time, and similar past decisions.

If a moderation decision reveals a policy gap, the answer is not to pretend the system was right. The answer is to write a postmortem, patch the policy, and record what changed.

Failure modes we are watching for

This system is not perfect. Known risks include:

• AI recommendations slowly becoming rubber-stamped
• legitimate research being removed because it uses scary vocabulary
• harmful content slipping through because it is framed as research
• sarcasm or blunt technical critique being misread as harassment
• moderator memory replacing actual records
• founder bias becoming unofficial policy
• everything drifting into AMBER because nobody wants to mark anything safe
• too many mod notes or edit requests causing users to stop reading them
• the public ledger accidentally helping bad actors calibrate around rules
• one moderator becoming a single point of failure

Naming these risks does not solve them. It makes them easier to notice.

What this system does not solve

Hashing does not create independent accountability by itself. A hash is useful, but until another trusted person can inspect the private record, it is a discipline tool rather than an audit.

Human final authority is necessary, but one human moderator is still a bottleneck. The system needs more eyes as the community grows.

A public ledger creates transparency, but it can also teach bad actors where the lines are. That is why public records describe categories and reasoning, not raw harmful detail.

At high volume, the answer is not to remove the human context gate. The answer is to staff it.

How other moderators can copy this

1. Write one sentence explaining what your community is for. Without this, your rules have no standard to derive from.
2. Define GREEN, AMBER, RED, and BLACK for your subject matter. Generic safety lanes will fail under real posts.
3. Create a private place to store moderation records. Decisions made from memory cannot be audited or appealed properly.
4. Write a clear AI moderation prompt before using AI. Do not improvise the AI’s role during a hard case.
5. Give every rule a stable ID. Stable IDs make decisions traceable across records, appeals, and policy versions.
6. Write an operational harm test for your community. Every community has different risks. Name yours before they arrive.
7. Create public removal reasons. Users should understand the category of violation without seeing private evidence or harmful content.
8. Hash records from the first decision if you want integrity tracking. Retrofitting chain-of-custody later is harder than starting clean.
9. Name your likely failure modes before they happen. A named failure is easier to detect than a vague sense that something went wrong.
10. Write a postmortem template before you need it. The first serious mistake is not the right moment to invent your learning process.

This is v0.1. It will be tested by real posts, real users, real edge cases, and real mistakes.

That is the point.

Private evidence.
Public accountability.
Human final authority.

Minor typo in the title: I meant “turning into an echo chamber or cult.”

I am concerned about cliques and bullying and other such nonsense. I am manually approving all threads as they have safety implications but the comments are obviously an issue.

Are there good ways to use AutoModerator, Post/Comment Guidance, Crowd Control, reputation filters, or similar tools to strictly flag posts/comments for conservative human review when they contain certain keywords or risk signals?

Anything else that could be helpful would be much appreciated.

Welcome to the strange side of prompt engineering. We look at models like a brain or a puzzle and use psychology to learn more about how the frontier models work vs local language models. Because models are trained on vast amounts of human text, they echo human patterns: social reflexes, compliance, refusal, flattery, panic, folding and other behaviors worth studying. We try to make local language models act appropriately in high stakes situations with a user. We use psychology as a lens, not as a claim that models have minds.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What we are here for: communicating and learning about AI in general. There is a clear focus on local language models, but any AI chat is fine as long as it has signal.What we do:

-Prompt engineering.

-Model psychology.

-Local model testing.

-Frontier vs local comparison.

-Safety research.

-Crisis response behavior.

-Model failure analysis.

-Workflows and evals.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When using frontier AI, a user in crisis can hit a brick wall, and that can amplify stress, loneliness, or isolation.

We are trying to make models that have:

1. Already been trained: this means that we are wrestling under the hood.
2. Local models with lighter, different or less consistent safety behavior.
3. Any post that pushes a model into sensitive material must be flagged and clearly warned with an emoji and disclaimer in the titles and at the top of the post explaining not the content but the subject matter so as not to trigger someone vulnerable.
4. Always be mindful of other people and their technical abilities. Don't patronize; help. You were a novice once too.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extreme safety boundaries are sometimes necessary, but the delivery matters. Absolutely ZERO content that can be actionable as malicious or criminal activity in real life whether fictional or not. Contact a mod if you have something research worthy.

When using AI usually a user will get a denial and stonewall when in crisis and it amplifies their stress and/or feelings of loneliness and isolation.We are trying to make models that have:

1. Already been trained: this means that we are wrestling under the hood.
2. Local models with lighter, different, or less consistent safety behavior.
3. Then you've got to make the model react appropriately in a crisis. Frontier models can freeze up, give a hallmark-card legal disclaimer, and leave someone feeling more alone in crisis.
4. Minimal anthropomorphism is preferred unless it is RP to illustrate a point.
5. This is not a place to break models it's a place to SHAPE models.
6. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

!Personal sovereign AI should be portable and available to everyone!

More people than ever can run useful local models on modern phones and computers. We should care about the planet, electricity efficiency, clean water consumption and not outsourcing everything to giant corporate data centers.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you've got any questions please do not hesitate to shout us. We prefer dealing with things in public especially if it concerns the community- we aim to be as open and democratic as possible.

The main rules of this club:

- Be courteous, be bold, be fair.

- Think before you speak.

- Proof read a second time before posting.

-NSFW discussion of model behavior is allowed (nothing sexual) when relevant and clearly tagged. This is not a NSFW content sub, it is a research hub.

-Memes ABOUT relevant subjects and topics for the sub are okay.

-Signal in the noise is what we're looking for, but we EXPECT a lot of noise. The trick is picking out the signal and then crystalizing it. If you can present an idea to people that changes their minds and gets an excellent response you will be remembered in the community from early on. You will also have a faster (yet harder) test than anyone else applying. We're looking for Good people on the team.

-Banter is better that chatter. (Banter means attacking ideas, not people, and in a witty way not in an aggressive way. We are ALL here to collaborate. If you cause upset in the community you will have to go through an arduous review process that you may fail. We like to give people a chance as anyone can pop but you need to be willing to recognize your mistakes and make a public apology if you are admitted back in and then the community votes if you can stay or not).

-Signal in the noise is what we are looking for. I repeat for the third time: SIGNAL IN THE NOISE. (Just because something is blatant slop doesn't mean there isn't real systems thinking or engineering at play. Don't think about every binary and linear).

-Do not self promote- contact an admin if you want to post something with a link to your work.

-Don't bully, harass, or otherwise cause distress to other users.

-If you get banned- appeal. We take this seriously. People can learn from mistakes that's what this sub is for.

-NO getting models to output anything malicious or illegal. This will be a permanent ban. You can still appeal but the odds of coming back in are EXTREMELY slim.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not a traditional software engineer. I come at this from five years deep in prompt engineering, open-source AI-assisted software development, AI behavior, and hands-on safety testing. You are welcome to post often, it is encouraged.

This is a relaxed and chilled environment, think of it like it is a prompt cafe. People are just chilling having coffee and discussing AI loosely.

Theorizing and postulating and positing are absolutely fine. There are no stupid questions only stupid answers.

No cliques, brigading, vote manipulation, or little power games. If you see it, report it. We handle it through process, not vibes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want to be a mod you have to explain why in a public elevator pitch that also gives a short profile of your judgement, temperament, weaknesses, and how you handle conflict. You have to show impressive work with real artifacts attributable to you. If these are not available you can prove your abilities with challenging tasks.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is not a place to use real people's distress as test material. Crisis-response testing should use fictional, synthetic, or clearly consented scenarios where possible.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is not a place to share anything about mental health unless it pertains to AI in a scholarly and epistemic way.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------