Is this really what we're discussing though? I can see why one would
want an AI policy not to bar on copyright grounds something that is not
copyrightable in the first place. That's reasonable. But I don't think
it's what people really mean when they're concerned about
copyright.
The wording of the proposals bans *all* contributions where AI is used in their creation, without any regard to the copyrightability of the contribution itself.
So that is why the argument is proposed, that if teh copyright *is* the key concern, then the policy should not apply to contrubitions small enough not to be considered as copyrightable and do so explicitly.