I do wonder what a random dip in quality causes in a long running conversation? Does the conversation recover at a later point, or does the introduction of temp

I do wonder what a random dip in quality causes in a long running conversation? Does the conversation recover at a later point, or does the introduction of temporary idiocy permanently affect the rest of the conversation? Statistically, probably likely that the dip occurred at a point that wasn't too important? But what happens if the idiot comes out at a critical point? Kind of reminds me of the two alternate ways that time travel works in sci-fi. Does the small change to the past explode like a fission reaction, or does history heal itself? Anywho, if errors do accumulate, I can see being very pissed off even with temporary idiocy from the model, as it means it poisons the context for the entire rest of the conversation.