Regarding two of the stories we published in March 2026, Issue #26 of Solarpunk Magazine, “The Mycelium Daughter” by Bella Chacha and “The Baobab Data Tree” by Irene W. Collins: Thanks to the work of a number of editors within SFF fiction, a substantial amount of evidence has been gathered that these two authors are
1) the same person, and
2) using generative AI to produce their stories.
There is nothing inherently wrong with an author using multiple pen names. However, this author submitted stories to our magazine under two different names, while withholding the fact that they are the same person behind both pen names. If we had known that, at the very least we would have published the two stories in different issues, rather than the same issue. Regardless, they misrepresented themself and violated our submission policy. That doesn’t sit well.
As publishers, we’re inundated with submissions that are potentially AI generated, and it is becoming more and more difficult to identify a piece of AI writing simply by reading it. As a result, we’re vigilantly on the look out for tools that will help us identify and weed out AI generated work. So we completely understand why publishers have started using AI checkers. In many ways, it feels like there isn’t much other choice.
At the same time, here at Solarpunk Magazine we are very wary of AI checkers. We do not use them, and we believe it is unethical for publishers to use them, especially without permission from authors. AI checkers are also generative AI programs. While they aren’t as energy intensive as LLM text generators, we believe it is a hypocrisy for publishers to use AI checkers (especially without a clear policy stating that publishers may run authors’ work through an AI system and permission from authors to do so) while insisting that authors are not allowed to use AI themselves at any stage of the writing or brainstorming process.
Don’t misunderstand, this is not a suggestion that publishers should start accepting AI generated work. Quite the opposite, we’re only suggesting that AI checker AI is as unethical as LLM generator AI, and that publishers should rely on other methods to determine whether a given work was or was not generated by AI. It is also true that other publishers, so far as we know, don’t rely solely on AI checkers in determining the authorship of a work. Still, we stand opposed to the use of AI checkers at all.
Rather than using AI checkers without author consent or knowledge, we rely on our own knowledge of the writing craft and the conversations and interactions we have with authors to help us determine if a piece of work was created using AI. That’s not a perfect method, but neither are AI checkers, which are known to not only produce false positives, but to produce false positives at higher rates for writers of color, ESL authors, and neurodivergent authors.
Early in the process of assessing the writing, we had made the conscious decision to not take action against the writer; spec-fic publishers who raised initial concerns were transparent about their use of AI checkers as diagnostic tools and, as we’ve noted here, we find those tools unreliable and problematic. However, much more evidence than AI checkers has been gathered since then in regards to stories supposedly written by Bella Chacha, aka, Irene W. Collins, aka Charity Ogechi, aka Victory Fortune, aka Ferdinand Ugochukwu. That evidence includes the refusal to discuss craft with editors or to provide story notes and early drafts that are part of every human’s writing process and that would go a long way to prove these stories were written by a human. When we tried to contact Bella/Irene to have a similar conversation, we were ignored.
We have removed Bella Chacha and Irene W. Collins stories from Issue #26, and we are in the process of resending the issue to all our subscribers, and to anyone who has purchased a copy of Issue #26.
We want to assure our readers and the authors we publish that we do what we can within ethical reason to weed out AI authorship from our submission pool. While it’s entirely possible we won’t always get it right, and that we’ll make mistakes again in the future, we will always be transparent about and be accountable to our community of readers and writers for our mistakes.
In solidarity,
The Solarpunk Magazine
Editorial Team
Discover more from Solarpunk Magazine
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Dear Solarpunk, Thank you for handling this in a professional fashion. Very greatly appreciate it. I pulled last week a story from an anthology where the publisher admitted to using AI in the artwork for the issue. This was undisclosed. It was handled extremely unprofessionally. Richard Simonds
That’s so frustrating – for everyone. And yes, a human just used an em dash. Thank you for the accountability post.
Seriously, em dashes are not something we assume means AI use. I love em dashes and use them in my own writing!
I also use em dashes and I’m certainly neither a robotic machine or someone who uses AI.
Thank you for being transparent about this and providing a solid explanation of your decisions. There’s a nonprofit called Real Good Ai that offers a free questionnaire writers/creators can use to quantify the amount of generative AI used in the creation of their work:
https://www.realgoodai.org/real-rating
Thanks for being awesome!
Ooh thanks we’ll definitely check that out!
As a professor of English, I get it.
Sent from Proton Mail for iOS.
Appreciate your commitment to integrity! I hate AI in all its forms and believe it poses a great danger to everyone on Earth. It has shown to primarily be being used for malign and manipulative means and should never have been allowed to be developed for these purposes.
Hello.
Humanity seems to be at the mercy of SUSTAINABLE PROBLEMS, everything from LITTER to WARS !
If it\’s keeping people employed and contributing to the economy, then it\’s hands off, untouchable, your not even allowed to criticise it anymore, why would anyone want to, we\’ve all got to earn a living . ( correct ? ).
Swooping a cow for a bag of magic beans is a fairy tale.
Trading people\’s lives, their futures, the future\’s of every living thing on the Planet for, money in the bank and a fairy tale lifestyle. THAT\’S JUST INSANE !
People used to accuse me of, always over thinking everything. I\’d usually reply, \” isn\’t that what INTELLIGENT people do ? \”.
Take litter for example, picking it up and relocating it a landfill site, solves nothing, it\’s not environmentally friendly. It\’s a Sustainable problem.
The only GENUINELY environmentally friendly Solution is NOT TO MAKE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. ( the same principle applies to WARS, don\’t make them in the first place. ).
In fact it does not take a genius to figure out that the only GENUINELY environmentally friendly solution to anything is to, GROW MORE and MANUFACTURE LESS, a lot less.
Some people say that EVOLUTION is survival of the fittest, others that it\’s the ability to best adapt to an environment.
Essentially Evolution is SURVIVING, ( the will to survive.).
At any given moment, there must be millions, possibly billions of people, starring at screens, watching movies, sport or other activities, meaningless pastimes, trivial pursuits.
I believe that the Romans had an expression for it, BREAD AND CIRCUSES !
January this year, THE DOOMSDAY CLOCK was set at 85 seconds to midnight, the closest that it has ever been to an EXTINCTION LEVEL EVENT !
WHAT ARE PEOPLE THINKING ?
Clearly something is very, very wrong and what are people doing about it, what are they being encouraged to do about it ?
Basically SPEND MONEY ! Money in the bank and a fairy tale lifestyle, CONSUMER SLAVERY and that\’s the legacy that they want to leave their Children.
People have obviously been intentionally \’ groomed \’ in to groups, Nationalities, Religions, football teams, to make them easier to manipulate and motivate.
Their every thought, action, is the culmination of generations of upbringing, education and pier pressure. ( FREE WILL is a myth ! ).
SURVIVING ( EVOLVING ) isn\’t wining a war, it\’s putting an END TO WARS ! Ending Poverty, Hunger, Disease, rectifying Humanities numerous mistakes. Putting an end to all \’ the bread and circuses \’ and giving our lives, PURPOSE AND MEANING !
Maybe I\’m over thinking this again, ( but that\’s what INTELLIGENT PEOPLE DO ! ).
Paul.
Thanks! 👍
Wow! Insightful and appreciated, thanks for sharing on how you approach this. Unsure who’d be a genuine fan of solarpunk fiction and think it’s a good idea to use AI to create texts for publishing.
That is unfortunate that it has come to this but appreciate the open resolution of this. Kudos to the team!
And to those that do submit AI stuff. While yes, maybe they wanted to contribute and figured this was a means of getting over the line in terms of a skills gap, but one has to wonder what the point is in putting ones name to something they didn’t really make? Merit without reason must feel very hollow.
In taking the short cut they are doing a disservice to both the reader and themselves. Give it a try without the use of generative anything, maybe its not the best results at first but that is just the first step to doing it great the next time, o r the time after that. In trying to short cuts to the finish line that ends up with a form of erosion of trust and that is one of the most important traits for a brighter future. Once trust is gone, you tend to be left behind.
Sounds like us authors need to start doing the equivalent of a time lapse of a painting. As someone who is a discovery writer, I’m often plotting as I go. Especially with a short story, I don’t have any planning notes as I didn’t plan anything. I don’t have an outline. I got a fun or wild idea and just started writing. I’m editing and polishing as I go before I ever have a finished draft. How would I provide story notes and early drafts to satisfy that I’m not AI?
I applaud your position