Spot AI-Sounding LinkedIn Posts
You cannot reliably identify an author's tool from style alone. You can, however, spot generic writing and make it more specific, verifiable, and recognizable.
In short
A post feels generic when it could come from anyone: no lived situation, no verifiable example, automatic transitions, and an interchangeable close. Fix it with real proof, a specific opinion, your own wording, and an action the reader can actually try.
Do not detect a tool, evaluate the text
A LinkedIn post can be written with AI and still be good. A fully human-written post can also be vague and interchangeable. Style alone cannot reliably identify which tool was used.
The reader does not always think "this is AI". They feel something simpler: no tension, no detail, no recognizable voice. They scroll. The useful question is not "how do I prove the origin?" but "what makes this text useful and attributable?"
The 7 signs of generic writing
1. No concrete scene. The post talks about discipline, productivity, or leadership without saying where, when, with whom, or what actually happened.
2. Overly symmetrical sentences. Three paragraphs with the same length, three bullets with the same rhythm, a perfectly clean conclusion.
3. Automatic transitions. "It is not just X, it is Y", "in today's fast-paced world", "the real question is".
4. An opinion with no tradeoff. The text is reasonable and impossible to disagree with, but never says what the author would choose or why.
5. Lists with no operating detail. "Be consistent, provide value, stay authentic." Everything is true, nothing is directly testable.
6. Vocabulary that is not yours. You never use these words when speaking, but they suddenly appear in every post.
7. A moralizing close. The post ends with a universal lesson instead of a limitation, example, or next action.
The recognition test, not a detection test
Remove your name from the post.
Could someone familiar with your work recognize a situation, phrase, or decision that belongs to you?
If the answer is no, the post probably lacks identifiable material. It is not necessarily bad, but it is interchangeable. This does not prove AI was used; it simply shows what to strengthen. Compare it with LinkedIn AI slop examples to name the weakness instead of rewriting at random.
How to fix it with four questions
Add:
- ›the situation and context;
- ›the decision you made and the alternative you rejected;
- ›the proof available, even if incomplete;
- ›the limitation or case where the advice does not apply.
Then review two parts:
- ›the first line, which should represent the real promise;
- ›the final sentence, which should offer a useful next step instead of a moral.
These are two places where generic phrasing can easily replace your intent. For a quick pre-publish check, use the AI slop checker, then try the LinkedIn post rewriter when the idea is good but the wording no longer sounds like you.
The right place for AI
AI can structure, shorten, suggest angles, and remove writing friction. It should not invent your posture, numbers, clients, or results.
The right workflow:
1. You provide the raw material.
2. AI proposes structures and flags unsupported passages.
3. You choose the angle and tradeoff to defend.
4. You add the lived detail and limitation.
5. You review the first and final lines before publishing.
TheyWillReadMe is built for this role: helping you structure a draft without confusing fluent text with publishable text. To start from your own examples instead of a detector, read how to write a post in your own voice.
Frequently asked questions
Does LinkedIn penalize posts written with AI?
Do not infer a penalty from one post. LinkedIn describes several relevance and quality signals, but it does not publish a simple rule that identifies or punishes the use of a writing tool. Review the content for value and accuracy, not to pass a detector.
What are the signs of a generic AI post?
They are clues of generic writing, not proof that AI was used: interchangeable sentences, abstractions without examples, reflexively balanced lists, automatic transitions, and a conclusion with no stake. Focus on what the reader can verify or try.
How do you make an AI post sound more human?
Add the situation, decision, proof, and limitation. Remove abstractions you cannot illustrate, then rewrite the hook and final sentence if they do not match your intent.
They Will Read Me
Draft your next LinkedIn post with a real review step.
The AI proposes a draft in your style. You check it. You publish.
Start for free