The tells that make writing sound like AI (and how to fix each one)

People can't always explain why a post feels off, but they sense it almost immediately and keep scrolling. What they're reacting to is a set of patterns: habits the models fall into that, once you've seen them a few times, are impossible to unsee. Here's the field guide, with the fix for each.

The em-dash everywhere

Generated posts often overuse the em-dash. One per paragraph, sometimes two, usually in that "clause — extra clause" rhythm. Human writers tend to use it less predictably, and with more intention.

Fix: Read the post and keep at most one em-dash. Turn the rest into full stops. Short sentences carry more weight anyway.

Puffery instead of specifics

"Powerful." "Seamless." "Game-changing." "Robust." Adjectives that sound like value but carry none. They're what a sentence reaches for when it doesn't have a fact.

Fix: Delete the adjective and put a specific in its place. Not "a powerful workflow" but "cut our drafting time in half." If you can't name the specific, the claim probably isn't true yet.

The "it's not X, it's Y" reflex

"It's not about working harder, it's about working smarter." Once you notice this construction, you'll see it in a lot of generated posts. It feels insightful and says almost nothing.

Fix: Cut it. State the point directly. If Y is the real idea, just say Y.

Suspicious symmetry

Three bullet points, each the same length, each starting with the same kind of phrase. Real thinking is lumpy: one idea is big, another is a footnote. Perfectly balanced structure reads like a template.

Fix: Make the list uneven on purpose. One long point, one short. Cut the third if it's only there to make three.

The rhetorical-question opener

"Ever wondered why some posts go viral?" It's a stall dressed as a hook. The reader hasn't been given anything yet, just asked to do the work.

Fix: Open with a specific instead. A number, a moment, a claim. "Last week a post with a typo outperformed everything I'd polished for a month."

The closing that begs

"What do you think?" "Agree?" "Drop your thoughts below." A confident post lands its point and stops. The plea for engagement reads as exactly that.

Fix: End on a statement. If a question genuinely belongs, make it a real one, specific enough that answering it takes thought.

The stacked hedge

"It's often the case that many teams sometimes struggle to…" One qualifier can be honest. Three in a row drain the life out of a sentence and hide whether you're actually saying anything.

Fix: Keep the qualification that's true; cut the ones added only to sound safe. "Teams often struggle with this" says as much as the stacked version, and you can read it without wincing.

How to actually apply this

You don't need to memorize the list. Do one pass with a single question in mind: would I say this sentence out loud to someone I respect? Most tells don't survive it. The puffery sounds fake, the symmetry sounds rehearsed, the begging sounds needy.

This is the same standard SelfSM is built around, so the draft comes back with these patterns already stripped and the editing pass is short instead of a rescue mission. For the fuller argument on why this matters, start with why AI social posts get ignored. When you're editing your own chatbot output, this walkthrough turns the list above into a repeatable pass.