unslop

Run the text through the unslop process: scan for the 31 documented patterns, rewrite each instance while preserving meaning, then add human voice through opinions, varied rhythm, and specifics. Finish with a self-audit asking what still looks machine-generated.

Common tells include puffery like "pivotal moment", vague attributions like "experts believe", superficial -ing phrases, rule-of-three structures, chatbot closers like "I hope this helps", and abstract jargon such as "leverage", "landscape", and "tapestry".

No. The rewriting step explicitly preserves meaning and matches the intended tone. Patterns are replaced with plainer equivalents, such as "utilize" becoming "use", and vague claims are either sourced or deleted rather than altered in substance.

Cutting patterns is only half the job; sterile, voiceless writing is equally obvious. Add soul by stating opinions, varying sentence length, using first person where it fits, and replacing generic statements with specific facts or numbers.

Avoid it when strict formal register is required, such as legal filings or compliance documents where first person and informal rhythm are inappropriate. The method targets prose meant to read as human-written, not templated or regulated text.