Thanks for this, Sam, which certainly flags up many grey areas. I scored 7 out 8, and was told that wasn't good enough because I'd falsely accused a student. In fact, the outcome was the opposite - I passed a student who did use AI. I found the game interesting and it confirmed that I am getting better at spotting AI's writing style, and the reasons students might use it.
I do think, though, that in many of the questions the issue lies with the university's policy. As an autistic lecturer, I think it might be great for a neurodivergent student to use AI as assistive technology. The issue would be transparency and to have the usage discussed and approved beforehand to ensure it is tailored to the student's needs.
In the case of someone who speaks English as a Foreign Language, or is nervous about their academic writing skills, I think there is a huge difference between using AI to edit one's writing, or consulting grammar/puncutation handbooks and/or a writing skills tutor. The latter engages the student in an active process of learning, analysis and revision. The former is a passive process in which an LLM rewrites one's work. Where is the skills-building in that?
I teach creative writing and am struggling to come up with AI proof assessments. I can do interactive exercises in class, but ultimately I need to see poetry and fiction on the page, as that is what publishers are looking for. We are strengthening the requirement to submit drafts of the creative work, and will as always work closely with student support staff to ensure that all students are treated fairly.