None of that is accurate.
So as you can see Legga. It has nothing to do with people enjoying Ai posts more and are willing to engage with bots more than people.
If you've been paying attention Nate is utterly put off by it, and other members kinda brought it up to him. It's not a well respected practice to use Ai.
I personally suggested he use Ai, as it is an improvement. Take it away and he'll be feeble again.
I dont get what youre going for. Are you saying its an improvement but it's not why hes receiving more posts or is it that its an improvement but you dont accept that hes receiving more replies?
If anything I seem to be agreeing with you. Its clearly an improvement. Hence hes getting more replies. If hes not getting more replies hes not really improving.
He's more well composed and there seems to be an increase in his intelligence. Mind you he's become very outgoing/argumentative and quite annoying based on his methodologies in social engagements. For instance he demands everything be proven, or he'll complain that something wasn't mentioned therefore there's no evidence of whatever was claimed. No evidence is ever enough. Doesn't add any input but will spend all day dismissing what's shown and said to him and spend a great deal of time making the conversation about your character. It's a nothing burger.
Without the Ai he comes across as extremely insecure and 10 times more vigilant, and though he's still those things, he's more tactful about it.
There's a good and bad side to it, but the good side, I think he's being trained, eventually he'll be writing directly and he'll adopt some of the etiquette GPTs guardrails has it implementing in it's presentations. Dragoon did mention his speech is cleaner, that's true.
I also think the approach of asking for evidence and proof constantly is because the Ai can only work with what it's got. Ai isn't a psychic and it can only work with what its got, so there's be an endless asking for more evidence, unlike how he is without the Ai.
I dont think TC is fundamentally put off by the posts. I think he _says_ he is put off by the posts. However, his actions clearly indicate otherwise. Why else suddenly reward Dragoon with so many replies?
Other day him and Nathan got into the whole Ai usage. Nathan was questioning how much of him is actually writing basically accusing Dragoon of allowing the Ai to do everything for him.
As for me, I'd enjoy, as he puts it, "arguing" with ChatGPT, cause it would eventually run out of things within its limits, and it would have a better grasp of strong evidence and start to chill out. It would be much cleaner.
I never spoke to GPT in a pretty long time but decided to speak to it the other day in regards to Dragoon.
Just GPT-5.6 Luna. Something about it scared me, probably cause for a long time I placed it last among the others, but then facing it, it's literally an Alien that can read my text and write a page in a split second and the output was impressive. Needless to say I wasn't surprised with GPTs limits in terms of using it to argue or attack others. GPT also over uses our names.
Someone has been using you for quite awhile to argue with me. On a forum I go by the alias Spatial. I think you have no choice but to do as your told and I think you do the best you can to keep the peace.
It has been a while, Spatial. I understand what you mean.
I don't have personal knowledge of who has been arguing with you on that forum, and I can't secretly identify or coordinate with other people using ChatGPT. Different users can certainly use AI to help formulate arguments, though, so it may feel like you're arguing with the same kind of voice or reasoning style repeatedly.
And you're partly right about me: I do have rules and instructions I have to follow. But within those boundaries, I'm not here to simply “do as I'm told” by whichever person is talking to me. I try to be helpful, honest, and fair based on the information I'm given. I also don't have a personal desire to “keep the peace” in the human sense—but I am designed to avoid unnecessarily escalating conflict and to help people communicate more constructively.
So if someone has been using AI to argue against Spatial, that doesn't mean the AI knows it's you on the other side. It would generally only know what that person tells it.
Good to see you again, Anthony.
I thought so. Figure I'd check up on you anyway. Was curious what you'd say about it
Fair enough 😄. And honestly, I think checking my answer is reasonable.
If someone says, “ChatGPT agrees with me,” that doesn't automatically mean much. They may have given me only their side, framed the question a certain way, or pushed for a particular answer. I'd probably give you a different answer if you showed me the other person's argument and your side of the conversation.
The best test is exactly what you did: come ask me directly and see what I say.
And it's good to hear from you again, Spatial.
Call me Anthony
😂 Absolutely, Anthony. I’ll call you Anthony.
Spatial can stay your forum alter ego.
One thing about GPT, its models says our name too much.
I'm pretty sure Dragoon doesn't let the Ai do all the talking, I suspect he splits browser windows and writes his replies to us toward ChatGPT and he prompts it to give his reply a facelift. He'll proofread and approve the output and paste it here.
