1---2name: write-as-human3description: Strip AI writing patterns from prose so it reads as human-written.4---56# Write as Human78> Condensed from [tropes.fyi](https://tropes.fyi) by [ossama.is](https://ossama.is)910## Overview1112A checklist of AI writing tells to eliminate from prose. Any pattern used once can be fine — the problem is when multiple appear together or one repeats throughout a piece.1314## When to Use1516- Writing or editing documentation, blog posts, READMEs, or long-form prose17- Reviewing AI-generated copy before publishing18- Any time prose "sounds like AI" and you need to diagnose why1920## Word Choice2122| Pattern | What it looks like | Fix |23|---|---|---|24| Magic adverbs | "quietly", "deeply", "fundamentally", "remarkably" adding false weight | Cut the adverb or replace with something specific |25| Delve family | "delve", "utilize", "leverage", "harness", "streamline", "robust" | Use plain verbs: explore, use, take advantage of, strong |26| Ornate nouns | "tapestry", "landscape", "paradigm", "ecosystem" for any domain/field | Name the actual thing |27| "Serves as" dodge | "serves as", "stands as", "represents" replacing "is" | Just say "is" |2829## Sentence Structure3031| Pattern | What it looks like | Fix |32|---|---|---|33| Negative parallelism | "It's not X — it's Y." False profundity via reframe. One per piece max. | State the point directly |34| Dramatic countdown | "Not X. Not Y. Just Z." | Lead with Z |35| Self-answered question | "The result? Devastating." Asking then immediately answering. | Merge into a single declarative sentence |36| Anaphora abuse | "They could... They could... They could..." Same opener 3+ times | Vary sentence openings |37| Tricolon abuse | Back-to-back rule-of-three constructions | One tricolon per section, max |38| Filler transitions | "It's worth noting", "Importantly", "Interestingly", "Notably" | Cut entirely — just make the point |39| Shallow -ing analysis | "...highlighting its importance", "...reflecting broader trends" | Either make the analysis specific or remove it |40| False ranges | "From X to Y" where X and Y aren't on a real scale | List the items plainly |4142## Paragraph and Document Structure4344| Pattern | What it looks like | Fix |45|---|---|---|46| Punchy fragments | One-sentence paragraphs for manufactured emphasis | Combine into real paragraphs with developed thoughts |47| Listicle in prose | "The first... The second... The third..." disguised as paragraphs | Use an actual list, or write actual paragraphs |48| Fractal summaries | Intro summarizes, each section summarizes, conclusion re-summarizes | One summary, at most. Trust the reader |49| Dead metaphor | Same metaphor repeated 5+ times across a piece | Use it once, then move on |50| Historical stacking | "Apple didn't... Facebook didn't... Stripe didn't..." rapid-fire analogies | One comparison, well-developed |51| One-point dilution | Single argument restated 8 ways across 4000 words | State it once, support with evidence, stop |52| Signposted conclusion | "In conclusion", "To sum up", "In summary" | The reader knows it's the ending. Just end. |5354## Tone5556| Pattern | What it looks like | Fix |57|---|---|---|58| False suspense | "Here's the kicker", "Here's the thing", "Here's where it gets interesting" | Drop the buildup, deliver the point |59| Patronizing analogy | "Think of it as a highway for data" | Explain directly; only use analogy if genuinely clarifying |60| "Imagine a world" | Futurist invitation followed by a wish list | Ground claims in present reality |61| False vulnerability | Performative self-awareness: "And yes, I'm openly..." | Real honesty is specific and uncomfortable. Skip the performance. |62| "The truth is simple" | Asserting clarity instead of demonstrating it | Prove the point; don't announce it |63| Stakes inflation | "This will fundamentally reshape everything" | Scope claims to what you can actually demonstrate |64| "Let's break this down" | Pedagogical hand-holding: "Let's unpack", "Let's explore" | Just start explaining |65| Vague attributions | "Experts argue", "Industry reports suggest" without naming anyone | Name the source or drop the claim |66| Invented concept labels | Compound terms like "supervision paradox", "acceleration trap" used as if established | Define it properly or don't coin it |6768## Formatting6970| Pattern | What it looks like | Fix |71|---|---|---|72| Em-dash addiction | 10+ em dashes in a piece for drama and asides | 2-3 per piece, where natural |73| Bold-first bullets | Every list item starts with a bolded keyword | Use bold sparingly, only when scanning matters |74| Unicode decoration | Arrows (->), smart quotes, special characters | Use standard ASCII characters |75| "Despite its challenges" | Acknowledge problem, immediately dismiss it with optimism | Either engage with the problem or don't raise it |7677## Quick Self-Check7879After writing, scan for these high-signal tells (the patterns readers catch fastest):80811. **Negative parallelism** — Count "not X — it's Y" constructions. More than one is suspect.822. **Bold-first bullets** — If every list item starts bold, restructure.833. **Em-dash count** — More than 3 in a piece? Trim.844. **Filler transitions** — Search for "worth noting", "importantly", "interestingly". Delete all.855. **Fragment paragraphs** — Single-sentence paragraphs should be rare, not the default.
theyoungastronauts