——Let Long-Form Creators Focus on Content and Truly Hand Operations Over to the Algorithm
In my article posted a few days ago (https://x.com/zhuweisha2/status/2038798332555035069), I proposed that the creation logic of high-quality long-form content is similar to WeChat Public Accounts — it relies on the content itself to attract readers, rather than depending on short, fast-paced interaction tactics. In the age of artificial intelligence, we can fully utilize Grok to objectively score long-form posts and prioritize recommending them to potentially interested users.
Some commenters have said: “Using Grok to score content will lose objectivity.” Is that really the case?
Grok’s Scoring Is Highly Objective and Iterative
Grok scores based on vast knowledge and facts. It can quickly detect plagiarism or obvious lack of originality. Its breadth and depth of knowledge far exceed any single human expert, placing its overall judgment at the upper-middle level of the industry. More importantly, Grok has no common human positional biases — human evaluations are often influenced by political stance or personal preferences, while Grok bases its judgments strictly on logic and evidence.
If you are dissatisfied with a score, you can directly raise questions, and it will accept explanations and adjust the score. This interactive iterative process is itself highly transparent.
Recommended 5 Scoring Dimensions and Weight Suggestions
I recommend the following dimensions:
- Content Novelty
- Logical Soundness
- Factual Persuasiveness
- Readability
- Overall Value (contribution to the industry or society)
For high-quality long-form content, Novelty and Overall Value should be given higher weights. A piece that lacks genuine innovation or real value has limited meaning even if its logic is rigorous. Of course, if there are obvious flaws in the basic logic, even high innovation value will be greatly discounted.
My actual writing process: Initial drafts usually score above 80. After multiple rounds of discussion and improvement with Grok, published articles generally reach above 90. When the score is lower, it is often because a cutting-edge or innovative concept needs further explanation — this is precisely where efficient collaboration between AI and human thinkers shines.
Grok Scoring Does Not Replace Human Judgment — It Provides a Verifiable Initial Signal
Grok’s score is not the final verdict, but a high-quality initial recommendation signal for the algorithm. The final power to like, repost, or comment remains with users. The score simply helps the platform identify truly valuable content among massive volumes and push it to people who may be interested, preventing quality content from being buried from the start.
To further enhance transparency, each dimension’s specific score and a brief rationale can be made public. Users who disagree can see the basis and participate in discussion, turning the scoring process itself into part of a high-quality conversation.
The Recommendation Logic of the AI Era Is Completely Different from the Internet Era
Internet-era algorithms mainly relied on “initial engagement data” (open rate, dwell time, likes, reposts, comments) because the technology at the time could not truly understand content.
In the AI era, the scarcest and most valuable resource is high-quality thinking. We have already seen many unknown pieces of content or applications go viral overnight — not through marketing, but through genuine insight and innovation.
However, a large number of thinkers are still shut out: they are not programmers, they struggle even with AI tools, and the marketing threshold remains high.
What X should do is allow thinkers to focus on thinking without having to market themselves, letting the platform’s AI handle recommendation and distribution.
This is the true strategic implementation of X’s claim to “incentivize high-quality original content.”
Conclusion: The Best Window to Break Through Old Algorithm Thinking Has Opened
We thinkers were attracted by X’s creator incentive slogan, only to find that we lack the time and energy to adapt to outdated recommendation strategies.
X does not need to pursue the most cutting-edge AI models. Product logic determines the market. X’s greatest advantage lies in its massive user base and real-time data.
Using Grok to objectively score long-form content, apply an AI Star badge, and then prioritize recommending it to potentially interested users — this is already technically feasible and extremely valuable from a product perspective.
Grok is set to be fully integrated into X’s core recommendation algorithm next week (Product Lead Nikita Bier called it “the most important change we’ve ever made to X”). This is the best opportunity window.
I hope the X team will seize this moment: allow high-quality long-form creators to truly focus on thinking and delivering value, while truly handing “operations” over to AI.
Only then can X evolve from a traffic platform into a true intellectual high ground in the AI era.
Welcome to discuss:
- Do you think using Grok to score and recommend long-form content is feasible?
- In the AI era, how should platforms better balance “content quality” and “user engagement”?
- What are your expectations or suggestions for the algorithm after Grok’s integration?
——@zhuweisha2
@nikitabier
@grok
March 31, 2026
