Our simple editorial test always applies:

“Would a student or a professional learn something with this?”
→ If the answer is no, we don’t publish.

We use AI as a supporting tool, not a writing partner.

Every AI-assisted suggestion is reviewed, rewritten, or rejected by a human.

AI is brilliant at spotting patterns — but it still needs to get trained with a thousand cats to learn to recognize one.

At Naisu Press, we design with less: a few good examples, a lot of context, and human judgment that can’t be trained on datasets alone.

Who Does What?

✓ Creative, conceptual, strategic — always human.

✓ Using humor, cultural references, or lived experience

✓ Curating content and defining what’s worth publishing

✓ Conceptualizing books and framing them for specific audiences

✓ Clarifying tone, context, and learning value

✓ Writing original content, analysis, and commentary

◐ Drafting outlines from rough material (including notes by humans)

◐ Flagging vague or repetitive sections

◐ Rewriting awkward passages for clarity (reviewed by humans)

◐ Identifying factual claims needing citation

◐ Extracting structure for export (e.g. Markdown, EPUB)

◐ Grammar and style passes using regex and LLM

● Sometimes – Punctuation spacing and quote normalization via regex

● Markdown formatting cleanup

● Spellcheck in non-final drafts

AI is just a tool and can be pretty dumb, especially if you use it wrong, like any other tool.

Moreover, we believe in being transparent about how AI supports our work— and what remains human-only.