4 ms·

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation... Assume good faith. That's what I did. So, right back at you.

• otterley 1mo ago
  > That's what I did Please explain, because it's not coming across that way. It's coming across as needlessly picky and combative, especially after I told you what I meant (or, at least, didn't mean) and you continued to argue with me.
  • simoncion 1mo ago
    > Please explain... I'm neither required nor strongly obligated to do so, nor do I see significant personal benefit to doing so. So, I will not. However, these days it's quick and easy to command an LLM-based system to generate most any text. Before one demands an explanation from a human, perhaps one should machine-generate a plausible-sounding explanation and present that along with one's demand for a human-synthesized one?
    • otterley 1mo ago
      facepalm Way to double down on the “needlessly picky and combative” angle, dude.
      • simoncion 1mo ago
        > Way to double down on the “needlessly picky and combative” angle, dude. Sit and consider the points of similarity between my refusal-shaped reply and the entire conversation we had prior to it and you might find enlightenment, in the style of those classic Zen tales. Perhaps an LLM-based tool might be able to assist you in this, or maybe it will be distracting and misleading. GLHF and all that.
        • otterley 1mo ago
          > you might find enlightenment, in the style of those classic Zen tales Doctor, heal thyself.