Agora Scholars Program
Anti-AI & Plagiarism Policy
Agora exists to connect readers with real human scholarship. Every answer on this platform must be the genuine intellectual work of the scholar who submits it. This policy is strict, enforced, and non-negotiable.
AI-generated answers are strictly prohibited
Scholars on Agora may not use ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or any other AI tool to produce, draft, or substantially assist in writing their answers. Answers must be your own original work, written by you, reflecting your own knowledge and scholarly judgment.
Plagiarism from other sources is equally prohibited. You may include brief citations with attribution — for example, "see Taylor (2003) for further discussion of Aristotelian virtue ethics" — but copying text from any source and presenting it as your own is a violation.
What counts as a violation
Using AI to generate answers
Submitting text produced by ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or any other large language model as your own scholarly response. This includes generating a draft with AI and lightly editing it.
Plagiarizing from other sources
Copying text from Wikipedia, academic papers, textbooks, or any other source and presenting it as your own original work. Brief citations with attribution (e.g. "see Smith 2019 for further discussion of X") are permitted and encouraged.
Submitting work you did not write
Having someone else — another scholar, a student, a colleague — write your answer for you. Every answer must be your own intellectual work.
What is allowed
- Brief citations with attribution — "see Smith (2019), chapter 4, for a detailed treatment of this argument"
- Referring to scholarly debates — "this is a contested point; MacIntyre and Williams disagree on whether..."
- Recommending further reading — "for a deeper dive, I'd suggest reading Nussbaum's The Fragility of Goodness, especially pp. 240-260"
- Using standard tools for formatting, spelling, or grammar checks (but not AI rewriting)
Consequences
First confirmed violation
The answer is removed. The scholar receives a formal warning and their account is flagged for review. Agora reviews the scholar's full history of answers.
Pattern of violations or severe first offense
The scholar's account is suspended. All pending proposals are cancelled. Agora reviews every answer the scholar has submitted and contacts affected users.
Repeated or egregious violations
The scholar is permanently banned from the Agora Scholars program. If the scholar is an expert who has referred PITMs, those referrals are reviewed independently.
AI Detection Guidelines for Users
Before reporting an answer, review these indicators carefully. No single indicator proves an answer was AI-generated. Look for a pattern of multiple indicators — that is what makes a report worth submitting.
Important: Some scholars write formally. Some are thorough. Some produce polished prose. These are not signs of AI — they are signs of expertise. Do not report an answer simply because it is well-written or comprehensive. Frivolous reports — those submitted without genuine evidence — may result in your account being banned from the Ask service.
Formulaic or template-like structure
The answer follows a rigid pattern — e.g. "There are three key aspects to consider..." followed by numbered subsections with generic headers. Real scholars tend to write organically, not in bullet-point templates.
No personal scholarly voice
The answer reads like a textbook summary rather than a scholar sharing their own perspective. It lacks opinions, qualifications ("I would argue..."), or the kind of hedging and nuance that real expertise produces.
Broad but shallow treatment
The answer covers many aspects of the topic but does not go deep on any one. It reads like a survey rather than an engaged response. Real scholars tend to focus on what matters most and explore it with depth.
Vague or absent citations
The answer makes claims like "scholars have argued..." or "research shows..." without naming anyone specific. Real scholars cite specific authors, pages, editions, or at least name the tradition they are drawing from.
Excessive diplomatic hedging
Every claim is wrapped in qualifiers like "it is important to note that..." or "one could argue that..." without ever committing to a position. While scholars qualify claims, AI tends to hedge everything equally to avoid controversy.
Unnaturally perfect prose
The writing is grammatically flawless with perfectly balanced sentence lengths and no idiosyncratic style. Real writing — even from accomplished scholars — has quirks, varied rhythm, and occasional rough edges.
Repetitive connective phrases
The answer relies heavily on phrases like "Furthermore," "Moreover," "It is worth noting that," "In conclusion," in a mechanical, evenly-spaced pattern. Real writing uses connectives more variably and sometimes omits them entirely.
Does not engage with the specific text
The answer discusses the topic in the abstract without referencing the specific passages, chapters, or arguments in the text the user asked about. A real scholar answering a question about a specific text would ground their response in that text.
How reporting works
If you believe an answer was generated by AI after reviewing the guidelines above, you can submit a formal report. Here is how the process works.
Review guidelines
Read the AI detection indicators above. Identify which specific indicators apply to the answer in question. You need at least one.
Write a full report
Explain in detail (minimum 100 characters) why you believe the answer is AI-generated. Reference specific passages. Select the indicators you observed.
Agora reviews
The Agora team reviews the reported answer, the scholar's full history of answers, and the quality of your report. This is a thorough, manual review.
Outcome
If upheld, the scholar faces consequences (see above). If dismissed, no action. If your report is found to be frivolous, your account may be restricted.
A note on frivolous reporting
Agora takes every report seriously — and that means we also take seriously the responsibility of reporters. The reporting system exists to protect the integrity of the platform, not as a tool for dissatisfaction with an answer's content, disagreement with a scholar's interpretation, or personal disputes.
Not a valid reason: "The answer was too long" or "I didn't like the answer" or "The scholar disagreed with my interpretation"
Not a valid reason: "It was well-written so it must be AI" or "They used formal language"
Valid reason:"The answer matches multiple indicators: it follows a rigid template structure, never engages with the specific text I asked about, uses the phrase 'it is important to note' five times, and contains no personal scholarly perspective or specific citations"
Users who repeatedly file frivolous reports — reports that are dismissed as baseless — may be permanently banned from the Ask service.
The Agora Scholar Pledge
By answering questions on Agora, every scholar — Expert and Professional in the Making alike — agrees to this pledge:
Every answer I submit is my own original work, written by me in my own words.
I will not use AI tools to generate, draft, or substantially assist in writing my answers.
I will not copy from other sources without brief, proper citation and attribution.
I understand that violations may result in removal from the Agora Scholars program.
I understand that Agora may review my full history of answers at any time.