A few things would be EXTREMELY helpful when allegedly restricted content is generated in Version 2. 1) One is for the error to describe what content was generated or prompt criteria was used that didn't pass the filter. Currently it tells us to review the input and try again, but review for what? How can we fix an issue that isn't addressed? It would be like if every feature request you got just said "Please fix issue" and then charged you for the suggestion. You wouldn't know what to do, but you would sure know you were losing money for the experience. I bet you would find that very frustrating. Basically, the AI filter found something objectionable. The AI knows what it was. The AI has the capability to put it into words. It could translate that into a description of which part of the image failed which criteria so we would know what to refine. It would at least make people less suspicious that it is failing content arbitrarily just to steal credits. I've dabbled with other services that credit the user back when restricted content is generated because they don't automatically assume the user is being malicious. More than half the times I've gotten a restricted content notificationI've literally changed nothing in the prompt (or changed one word like from "replicate" to "duplicate") and had it come back with a valid result. This tells me either the filter is too strong, the AI goes off-script way too often, or the "restricted content" error is being applied completely arbitrarily. Knowing at least what criteria it found offensive would help identify what the problem is or what needs to be fixed on the user's end. 2) Leave the "restricted content" error in the gallery until the user deletes it. Right now it stays up for two seconds and just disappears and I can't even read the message. If I look away from the computer for five seconds I don't even realize what just happened; sometimes I think my request didn't send and resend it, wasting multiple credits. Leaving the error in the gallery would be most helpful if error descriptions are implemented. 3) Of course crediting the user back, even if with a limit that could vary with each tier, would show the end users a gesture of goodwill. I'm pretty sure most of the users are aware of the community guidelines (or if not you could provide a side panel link to them) and aren't actively trying to violate them because that would be pointless.
