Who creates Spotly content?
The public product is published under the Spotly brand and reviewed by the site operator. We do not invent expert personas, fictional credentials or fake first-hand experiences to make a page look more authoritative.
Who · How · Why
How Spotly is made.
Spotly uses automation where it can make production more consistent, but not as a substitute for editorial judgment. This page explains who is responsible for the content, how AI-assisted scenes move through review, and where factual information needs evidence.
Owner: Spotly site operatorImage review and correction policyLast reviewed: 9 October 2026
Why does the content exist?
The primary purpose is the game: giving players original, replayable visual puzzles and useful context around the scenes they choose to explore. Search visibility supports discovery, but it is not a reason to generate pages that have no value outside a search result.
How is AI used?
AI can assist with concept development, original image generation, controlled edit proposals, draft metadata and draft explanatory copy. Generated material enters a review state. An AI response is not treated as evidence that a scene is accurate, playable or ready to publish.
How does a puzzle become playable?
Each scene uses an A/B pair, a locked set of intended visual edits and mapped hotspot geometry. The public catalogue only exposes pairs that pass the project’s visual and coordinate review gates. Existing approved artwork is not silently rewritten by later generation runs.
How are facts handled?
Real-world cultural, historical, scientific or place-specific claims require a source trail appropriate to the topic. If a scene is fictional, its lore is labelled as original fiction. If reliable support is missing, the claim stays out instead of being filled with plausible-sounding text.
How is AI-generated art described?
Spotly does not present generated scenes as documentary photography of real events or places. The production system keeps generation metadata and review history, and the public experience can disclose AI assistance where that context is useful to players.
Editorial rules
What we will not automate away.
Accuracy before fluency
A polished paragraph is not enough. Draft facts about real places, history, science, culture or named traditions must be checked against reliable sources before publication.
Originality before trend-chasing
Trend signals can suggest a mood, season, material or broad subject. They cannot authorise copying a franchise, trademark, public figure, protected character, signature product design or living artist’s style.
Playable before publishable
A beautiful image is not automatically a valid puzzle. Differences need to be intentional, independently detectable, non-overlapping and correctly mapped to the rendered image.
People-first pages
World pages explain what makes a category distinctive, how its scenes are designed and what is available to play. We do not create hundreds of near-identical pages by swapping a keyword into the same paragraph.
Corrections stay possible
Editorial content and metadata can be revised when a factual issue, unclear description or accessibility problem is found. Game art and difference geometry use stricter versioned review because changing them can invalidate a puzzle.
The practical rule
Image checks before public release.
Object masks preserve neighboring details. Pixel checks catch changes outside those masks; a reviewer still checks complete objects, reconstructed backgrounds and click locations.