not just frustrating but again, really really sincerely concerning. people unironically will use these exact arguments to say that sex workers deserve any mistreatment they get. or like, hell, victim blame Anyone who got into Any type of relationship where mistreatment happens that they couldn't forsee happening beforehand :/// "just do a different job!" "you should've been able to tell!" "but you said yes to cuddling with them, didn't you?" and so on.
it doesn't sound weird at all, i'm glad i left that impression on you. you seem cool, too :D!!! mmm but i do kind of want to keep my accounts separate for now, at least. part of it is not really wanting my Me associated with this account (although tbh. do i really care that much) but the other part of it is i don't want the bot bozo i've been arguing with or anyone else who might disagree with me here to go stalk my other accounts LMAOOO but we'll see. the third part of it is i'm gonna be so honest with you i only really post about minecraft on my tumblr and minecraft fanfic on my ao3 so if you do want to go searching...i will say that under a certain very niche, non-rpf gay minecraft ship tag, i have a fic called "desire" ehehe. i will think about whether or not i want to eventually share my accounts more directly, though ヾ(❀╹◡╹)ﾉ~
no worries!! do whatever is comfortable for you. there is a DM feature on this site also, in case you were unaware lol. but its all good either way! rn I’ll just follow you on this site.
btw i did witness the debate with the other user and i will say you cooked that mf. flam bayed, roasted and served. they reply to like every single comment that criticizes this story and i know they replied to me but i didn’t even read it LMAO. you really killed it though i was cheering in the bleachers.
WAAAAHHH WHERE i was trying to find it but couldn't!!! anyway yeah taking apart the ChatGPTisms was really satisfying. they really picked the wrong one to do that shit with. we'll see if they actually respond like a human being but i'm not holding my breath.
PQ, I want to acknowledge the harassment you've faced and assure you that I will follow your lead regarding Akaito. It seems Akaito is aware of you and some of your comments, but I am questioning if there might be a misunderstanding of your comments or potentially bad faith at play. Let me explain your intention here with your last comment. When we shift from writing to a person to speaking generally to others reading our messages, it indicates that we recognize there is no productive conversation possible with them and giving a situation we could be merely facing harassment from them.
When a conversation shifts from directly addressing a person to speaking generally, it often indicates a recognition that a productive discussion isn’t possible with that person and that harassment may be at play. It's disappointing to see that the conversation, which you sought to be constructive, devolved into personal attacks and name-calling from the beginning. When a discussion turns to such behavior, it typically signifies a lack of valid points and an attempt to undermine the dialogue through personal attacks. This is not productive and certainly not a debate.
It appears that Akaito has mischaracterized your intentions, accusing you of being a bot bozo and claiming you could stalk them, despite your clear disinterest and their fixation on you. This narrative aligns with tactics used by certain hate group.
You aimed for constructive dialogue, but Akaito's responses were more about forcing a debate or argument rather than engaging in a meaningful discussion. Many of their claims has no evidence or productive conversation. Akaito's focus on personal attacks rather than addressing factual information shows a lack of willingness to engage respectfully. How does one cook to serve in a debate when there is no debate? It’s hard to engage in a debate when no real debate exists and when Akaito refuted nothing.
Constructive dialogue should be based on facts and respectful discourse, not on personal attacks. It’s evident that Akaito conflated objective information with subjective opinions and tried to frame factual reporting as debatable. Their attempts to force a debate and misinterpretation of your method of communication suggest a misunderstanding of the nature of your conversation or trying to discredit you by a foolish argument. When you look at their comments they have been trying to discredit you because you have ask for a conversation in many of your comments and Akaito ignored that in many ways. I am referring to this comment, “If not to have a conversation or an argument then why?”
You put “It is not my working definition. This is not their opinion vs my opinion. This is them vs facts. Don’t ask for my opinion or my working definition as you will not get it. I am objectively reporting. This person is dismissing what I say and trying to change my comments for me to argue with them.”
Akaito’s response focused on demanding your definitions and disputing them, which seems to miss the point of your factual reporting. From Akaito’s comment you can tell there is not debate and so when they claimed Akaito cooked to served in a debate it was funny because it went against this conversation and even Akaito’s comments. Another example is how Akaito saying you keep saying they are wrong in their interpretation and you are saying something different.
AI tools, like ChatGPT, are meant to enhance clarity and effectiveness in communication, not to deceive. Your focus on content rather than methods is the right approach. A respectful dialogue should be grounded in understanding and factual discussion, not in attempts to undermine or demean. It seems Akaito preferred to challenge the refinement of your messages rather than the substance, possibly to create emotional conflicts and feel superior. AI is a valuable tool that helps many people enhance their language skills and express themselves more effectively. It’s all about continuous learning and growth, no matter the age or starting point.
Your efforts to keep the conversation fact-based and respectful were clear, and it’s unfortunate that Akaito's responses were dismissive and combative. It’s important to prioritize discussions with those willing to engage constructively. If someone disagrees with established facts, they are disputing the facts themselves not someone’s opinion.
Given these issues, it seems wise to step back from further engagement with Akaito. Your approach to seeking understanding and maintaining respectful dialogue is commendable, and avoiding further conflict with those not open to it is a sensible choice.
We believe that open and honest communication is key to resolving misunderstandings. However, the current discourse has devolved into name-calling and unfounded accusations, which is not conducive to a constructive resolution. We advocate for a respectful dialogue that seeks to understand rather than to accuse.
Also, it is interesting to see this one reusing words ( I have seen right through you and you can't fool me anymore) used against the hate group, it must have been the truth. When it is false it has little to no effect. No, they don’t see right through you and you were not trying to fool anyone. Akaito only has assumptions. You made the right choice to start avoiding Akaito.
okay bot! okay second account! pop off!!!
There is your proof they can't tell when it is chapgpt or not.
Calling people bots just shows they know they are wrong and they are here to fight. That took hours to read and write. At least I did not waste my time I wrote to you. Keep up the good work.
nah i checked yours and PQ’s activity pages and they’re very similar to one another. chatgpt used over there, too. i don’t care what you have to say anymore, keep responding, it’s funny. i’ll treat you like the word vomitter you’re committed to being. why don’t you ask chatgpt to spit out some jinx fanfic? though since jinx came out so recently you’d have to feed it a lot to get anything even halfway decent. plus i don’t think it would really be able to talk about the subject matter and themes presented in this webtoon. probably why there are all the non-answers.
like what you thought you would make me feel bad? feel ganged up on? nah bro this shit is fucking hilarious. yeah i’m sitting pretty on my moral high ground you are damn fucking right. i tried to engage in nuanced discussion with you, thinking you were a real person, about something that is deeply fucking important to me, and you chat back to me with shitty AI generated non-answer responses because you can’t articulate your own original thoughts, if you even have any to articulate to begin with. then you show up with an alternate account. you’re fucking pathetic bro. i’m here able to passionately and with well-formed opinions and research under my belt talk about rape culture and capitalism and art and shit. you’re using chatgpt. ad hom ad hom ad hom ad hom.
My comments are tagged to one person here, my friend. It is odd how some people will think those messages are for them to where they would respond when no one is talking to them for how they treat others.
if you read what i said you’d have seen i said you were using it to help you not that it consisted of your entire responses. but i guess that’s what happens when you’re too used to just copy-pasting shit into a glorified predictive text generator, giving its response a once-over, and then copy-pasting it back into people’s comments. you lose your ability to read, you lose your ability to critically think.
PT,
It seems several assumptions are being made about us including the claim that we are not "real" people. This tactic appears to be an attempt to discredit us rather than engage with the actual issues.. The laughter and insults suggest frustration rather than a genuine attempt at meaningful dialogue. The use of AI tools like ChatGPT was intended to enhance clarity and ensure our messages were not misinterpreted emotionally, especially given our experiences with harassment and cyberstalking from a hate group. There’s no real argument against using ChatGPT—it was about improving communication, not hiding behind technology.
The repeated personal attacks and lack of substantive responses are not productive. Constructive discussion should focus on ideas and evidence rather than resorting to ad hominem arguments. If Akaito had engaged in meaningful dialogue and asked questions rather than attacking, the conversation might have been more constructive. Claiming moral high ground while dismissing others’ perspectives and employing toxic behavior undermines productive conversation.
Open and respectful engagement is crucial for meaningful dialogue. Personal attacks only hinder progress. Akaito’s actions, characterized by constant attacks, are what derailed the conversation. When has Akaito engaged with you without resorting to attacks?
To reiterate, our use of ChatGPT was to clarify and refine our communication due to our specific circumstances, not to deflect from the conversation. Akaito’s focus on personal attacks and deflections from the main issues are why the discussion hasn’t progressed constructively.
i asked you clarifying questions several times and you did not answer. you were not even up front about the fact that you were using chatgpt and you could’ve been at any point during the conversation. i picked your shit apart and you left and came back and now you wanna continue to act like i’m the one acting in bad faith. well now i am, specifically towards you, bitty-bot (づ￣ ³￣)づ
Ain't 20-v-1, it's 1-v-20 if I gotta smack niggas that write with you
Yeah, bring 'em out too, I'll clean 'em out too
Tell BEAM that he better stay right with you
Am I battlin' ghost or AI? Nigga feelin' like Joel Osteen
Funny, he was in a film called "AI"
And my sixth sense tellin' me to off him
PQ,
It seems there are several misunderstandings and assumptions regarding our use of ChatGPT and how we use ChatGPT. The claim that we’re using ChatGPT to generate counter-arguments or analyze responses with the intention of manipulating the conversation is not accurate. While ChatGPT is a tool we use to ensure clarity and coherence, it does not create arguments or responses independently. It helps refine our messages to be more precise and clear, not to craft responses on our behalf or to engage in deception.
The comments about our supposed inability to read or think critically are personal attacks rather than constructive feedback. Such remarks do not contribute to a meaningful dialogue and distract from the actual issues being discussed. That suggests the person is upset instead of "laughing". Akaito misunderstood their assumptions are wrong but what is stated sounds like Akaito was saying the whole message was made then you edited it after you asked it to come up with counter-arguments, that is non-exist to Akaito. " Likely, you've been asking it to write it as if it were you, and it succeeded at times and failed at other times, so you had to manually go in and change and add things yourself to make it sound more human." It comes off that you were accused of using it to create your entire response. That is wrong.
PQ,
It seems there’s been some confusion, as it appears Akaito might think I am you. To clarify, I was not asked any clarifying questions, and from my perspective, it doesn’t seem that you were asked any either. While you did provide responses to nearly all queries, there may have been a few points left unanswered due to the nature of the discussion. I know you did not anwser one or two but you did not think there will be productive dialogue. I am glad Akaito has proven you right.
It’s important to emphasize that our aim has always been to engage in good faith and constructive dialogue. However, the comments suggest a shift away from this goal, with a tone and language that reflect frustration rather than a commitment to productive discussion. Akaito’s claims of “picking things apart” do not seem to address or counter the points made, which suggests an attempt to win the argument rather than engage meaningfully.
The personal attacks and references in the comments do not contribute to a constructive dialogue. We are here to discuss the issues at hand respectfully, not to engage in personal conflicts or confrontations.
Let’s focus on addressing the core issues with respect and openness, rather than allowing the conversation to be derailed by personal attacks or misunderstandings.
Ain't 20-v-1, it's 1-v-20 if I gotta smack niggas that write with you
Yeah, bring 'em out too, I'll clean 'em out too
Tell BEAM that he better stay right with you
Am I battlin' ghost or AI? Nigga feelin' like Joel Osteen
Funny, he was in a film called "AI"
And my sixth sense tellin' me to off him
Ain't 20-v-1, it's 1-v-20 if I gotta smack niggas that write with you
Yeah, bring 'em out too, I'll clean 'em out too
Tell BEAM that he better stay right with you
Am I battlin' ghost or AI? Nigga feelin' like Joel Osteen
Funny, he was in a film called "AI"
And my sixth sense tellin' me to off him
You probably already figured it out but Persistent Quill and Shielded Guard are the same person. They're a weirdo who gets really offended when you see through their "intellectual" mask. See how the second account showed up when you pushed back? They used to copypaste the first thing they googled to support their brainrotted argument that JK is not a rapist. Now they use chatgpt to write for them. Even their names are AI generated. I've got albums full of the crazy shit they've said and done.
Yeah 100%, see page two of this thread, I completely picked them apart. Also DM me the pics I'm so curious.
Hey,
As discussed with our friend, I decided to reconsider Akaito based on their recent approach, which shows a significant shift in tone. Their message to Manhwascipy indicates they are open to a more structured and respectful dialogue, which is what I had hoped for. I appreciate Akaito's willingness to engage in a structured and respectful discussion with Manhwascipy.
However, Akaito's treatment of me has been quite different, often feeling impersonal and dismissive.
It's puzzling how Akaito interacts with us, especially since they respond like a bot to you when not directly addressed. This behavior, combined with recent harassment from the sock puppet account (BaileyBot), makes me question whether this is a deliberate attempt by the hate group to escalate the situation.
I'm unsure if giving Akaito another chance is the right move. Their treatment of us has been confusing, particularly since they've shown little regard for me personally and have appeared to have preconceived notions without giving me a fair chance. Akaito never treated me or you as a human.
As our friend pointed out that Akaito seemed defensive and missed my points, which aligns with my experience of their dismissive and aggressive responses. This has made productive dialogue challenging from the start.
Another factor might be their view on AI tools. I use tools like ChatGPT to refine my responses for clarity, not to replace personal engagement. My responses are genuine, and I use AI to enhance communication, not to deceive.
Another reason could be this:
"The distinguishing between the two felt to me like it was implying a difference in severity." and it is not.
Another reason was I was calling people with different opinions and perspectives uneducated. That is just wrong.
Overall, it's been difficult to navigate these interactions, and I'm weighing whether to continue engaging with Akaito under these circumstances.
@SG,
I should have reviewed the topic before I posted my last comment. It seems Akaito quickly believes misinformation, which has influenced their treatment of me. They never gave me a fair chance and seemed to push me into conflict. Akaito might be another alt account of the haters, possibly a catfish.
That sock puppet using debunked information still.
The claim that “Persistent Quill and Shielded Guard are the same person” is a tactic to intimidate and is part of a hate group narrative.
The description of me as a “weirdo” who gets offended when others see through my “intellectual” mask is a deflection and doesn’t accurately represent the situation.
The suggestion that “the second account showed up when you pushed back” is misleading. I don’t recall Akaito pushing back; rather, I saw a tantrum over AI tools and attempts to control me through harassment. Shielded Guard appeared after I left the conversation but was trying to de-escalate the situation. Akaito’s responses have been childlike compared to their more respectful approach with Manhwascipy.
The accusation that “they used to copypaste the first thing they googled” is likely a reaction to being proven wrong, with targets being misrepresented by the sock puppet.
The claim about using ChatGPT to write responses is false.
The idea that “their names are AI-generated” is new to me and seems speculative.
The statement “I’ve got albums full of the crazy shit they’ve said and done” is misleading and spreads misinformation about their targets. The sock puppet has been debunked for months and continues to spread falsehoods. It shows how absurd their behavior is and how angry they are that they are wrong.
The claim that “see page two of this thread, I completely picked them apart” doesn’t reflect reality. It shows a desire to attack rather than understand. This seems indicative of a hate group with preconceived notions trying to harm us.
The request to “DM me the pics I’m so curious” seems to be an attempt to perpetuate lies and gaslight.
Overall, this situation appears to be driven by a sock puppet’s and a catfish account vendetta rather than a genuine discussion.
Nothing to add for now, the time, space, and energy I would need to detail all of my thoughts on all this exceeds every limit presented to me here. I need to see the story to completion before I make any final judgements. It did some things that I thought were genuinely interesting and praiseworthy at first and then began to fumble the bag with stupid plot devices and, well, mishandling the things it’d been doing well at first.
Look. If you’re into rape/non-con that’s fine. If you’re into the toxic shit that’s fine, so long as you understand that that is, in fact, what you’re reading. I’ll self-disclose and say I, too, enjoy those things (in a purely fictional context). But the fact that I am seeing several people in these comments trying to argue that what Jaekyung is/has been doing throughout this Webtoon WASN’T rape is deeply, deeply concerning to me. Usually I would blame the author for framing things in such a way as to make things ambiguous for reasons that have little to do with the story. But it is not the case here. Jaekyang is a wealthy man with status and power, physical and otherwise. He used those qualities from the get go and all throughout the Webtoon in order to get Dan, someone in a ridiculously desperate financial situation and with no leverage of his own to have sex with him. That is the gross abuse of power being used to coerce someone otherwise completely unwilling to have sex with you—that is rape. And it is a real and horrific thing that happens ALL the time in reality.
So don’t come at me with “technicalities” about this shit just because it’s fiction or whatever the fuck, because some of y’all aren’t talking about this as if it is, some of y’all aren’t applying nuance to this for the sake of having a worthwhile conversation. It’s genuinely scary to me that some of you seem to be unaware of the precise nature of what is going on here. Not that you’re reading the Webtoon, but that you don’t seem to be understanding it. It’s emblematic of many cultures’ poor sex ed and poor attitudes towards sex and consent. Because I don’t think anyone who has been educated enough should be able to walk away from this being unable to distinguish between rape and actual, consensual sex, especially when it is as clear-cut as it is here. I DO have to worry about how you guys would react to hearing someone in your real life in this kind of situation, or, and I hope it is never, ever the case, YOU being in this situation. Would you excuse it? Because you “agreed” to it? Would you relentlessly blame yourself like Dan does? Would you really be able to articulate your experience to get the help you need? Would you be able to respond well to someone else in this situation?