AI images rejected because of quality issues

IMO, these are all very dark. Dark images do not print well. Whatever you submit to Stock must be suitable for commercial-use.  I don't think these will reproduce well on a T-shirt or tote bag.

The third image down has a watermark in the bottom right corner. Also, these images look poorly drawn/rendered, but it's hard to tell without seeing them at full size. Not sure of what commercial value these would have either. They are "thingamaboops" that an AI art generator cobbled together, added a cool light effect, and now you're trying to submit them as . . . ?

Why wouldn't you have to do the work yourself? They're your images. 

Your posts here are too small to evaluate. You need to post one or two assets here as submitted. We can then take a look at them. 

As for your remarks: Check the stock database, and you will see that Adobe stock massively accepts generative AI. We are even thinking that the refusal rate is not high enough, seeing what comes through. 

You need to check the documentation, for understanding what quality issues are, and you can also read the posts here to see how to check your assets. It is, unfortunately so, that many contributors lack the basic knowledge of asset quality. 

May I ask what you consume here on Adobe stock? As a contributor, you are not a consumer. The consumers are the buyers. They have a right to high-quality assets, and they do not need to have to correct your errors before being able to use your asset. Moderation is to protect the customers, not for giving you a nice report on what to correct. As a contributor, you are a service provider (indeed the gas station), and you are supposed to be able to deliver a quality service. To keep your analogy, you are selling cars, and are expecting the customers to first repair the car, before they can drive it.