Return to Answer

This seems like documenting your research:

Search, and research

Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!

so I do not see any reason for it not to be allowed as long as it's properly indicated as such (which you intend). For sites with a blanket ban, you could just paraphrase the content. I see people talking about the results of their Google/Wikipedia/... searches, or asking a friend/colleague/teacher all the time - there's no reason to treat AIs differently.

Now, whether this counts as sufficient research, that's another question which probably varies per site. Some sites have explicit close reasons for this reason, on other sites users might just downvote you.

We recently had a similar discussion on English Language Learners: Is it on topic to ask about English advice given by ChatGPT?. For another example, see Has checkmate ever been achieved with the move 'castles kingside' in a high level chess game? on Chess.SE.

Stack Exchange currently bans ChatGPT generated answers.

FWIW, that's not true; some sites do, but many sites allow them provided they are properly attributed and when users do not blindly copy-paste the output but review it thoroughly. Unfortunately, 99% of the users don't ...

This seems like documenting your research:

Search, and research

Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!

so I do not see any reason for it not to be allowed as long as it's properly indicated as such (which you intend). For sites with a blanket ban, you could just paraphrase the content. I see people talking about the results of their Google/Wikipedia/... searches, or asking a friend/colleague/teacher all the time - there's no reason to treat AIs differently. On average, it may produce worse results than a search engine (depending on the topic and your search skills) right now - the situation will no doubt be different in 6-8 months/quarters/years. I mean, if even Google Alphabet is scared about it ...

Now, whether this counts as sufficient research, that's another question which probably varies per site. Some sites have explicit close reasons for this reason, on other sites users might just downvote you.

We recently had a similar discussion on English Language Learners: Is it on topic to ask about English advice given by ChatGPT?. For another example, see Has checkmate ever been achieved with the move 'castles kingside' in a high level chess game? on Chess.SE.

Stack Exchange currently bans ChatGPT generated answers.

FWIW, that's not true; some sites do, but many sites allow them provided they are properly attributed and when users do not blindly copy-paste the output but review it thoroughly. Unfortunately, 99% of the users don't ...

This seems like documenting your research:

Search, and research

Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!

so I do not see any reason for it not to be allowed as long as it's properly indicated as such (which you intend). For sites with a blanket ban, you could just paraphrase the content. I see people talking about the results of their Google/Wikipedia/... searches, or asking a friend/colleague/teacher all the time - there's no reason to treat AIs differently.

Now, whether this counts as sufficient research, that's another question which probably varies per site. Some sites have explicit close reasons for this reason, on other sites users might just downvote you.

We recently had a similar case on English Language Learners: Is it on topic to ask about English advice given by ChatGPT?

Stack Exchange currently bans ChatGPT generated answers.

FWIW, that's not true; some sites do, but many sites allow them provided they are properly attributed and when users do not blindly copy-paste the output but review it thoroughly. Unfortunately, 99% of the users don't ...

This seems like documenting your research:

Search, and research

Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!

so I do not see any reason for it not to be allowed as long as it's properly indicated as such (which you intend). For sites with a blanket ban, you could just paraphrase the content. I see people talking about the results of their Google/Wikipedia/... searches, or asking a friend/colleague/teacher all the time - there's no reason to treat AIs differently.

Now, whether this counts as sufficient research, that's another question which probably varies per site. Some sites have explicit close reasons for this reason, on other sites users might just downvote you.

We recently had a similar discussion on English Language Learners: Is it on topic to ask about English advice given by ChatGPT?. For another example, see Has checkmate ever been achieved with the move 'castles kingside' in a high level chess game? on Chess.SE.

Stack Exchange currently bans ChatGPT generated answers.

FWIW, that's not true; some sites do, but many sites allow them provided they are properly attributed and when users do not blindly copy-paste the output but review it thoroughly. Unfortunately, 99% of the users don't ...

This seems like documenting your research:

Search, and research

Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!

so I do not see any reason for it not to be allowed as long as it's properly indicated as such. For sites with a blanket ban, you could just paraphrase the content. I see people talking about the results of their Google/Wikipedia/... searches, or asking a friend/colleague/teacher all the time - there's no reason to treat AIs differently.

Now, whether this counts as sufficient research, that's another question which probably varies per site. Some sites have explicit close reasons for this reason, on other sites users might just downvote you.

Stack Exchange currently bans ChatGPT generated answers.

FWIW, that's not true; some sites do, but many sites allow them provided they are properly attributed and when users do not blindly copy-paste the output but review it thoroughly. Unfortunately, 99% of the users don't ...

This seems like documenting your research:

Search, and research

Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!

so I do not see any reason for it not to be allowed as long as it's properly indicated as such (which you intend). For sites with a blanket ban, you could just paraphrase the content. I see people talking about the results of their Google/Wikipedia/... searches, or asking a friend/colleague/teacher all the time - there's no reason to treat AIs differently.

Now, whether this counts as sufficient research, that's another question which probably varies per site. Some sites have explicit close reasons for this reason, on other sites users might just downvote you.

We recently had a similar case on English Language Learners: Is it on topic to ask about English advice given by ChatGPT?

Stack Exchange currently bans ChatGPT generated answers.

FWIW, that's not true; some sites do, but many sites allow them provided they are properly attributed and when users do not blindly copy-paste the output but review it thoroughly. Unfortunately, 99% of the users don't ...