RETARD WITH AI GENERATED GUIDES

[notamonLTNsub5]

look at this guy lol, two mid effort guides with a 7 minute gap? obviously AI or copy and pasting unless he can research like a god and has a 600 wpm LOL -rep this stupid nigga

 

[ethniccell098]

did not read

 

[Firstname.Lastname]

Claude, write a post explaining how op is dumb. It's not written by AI, it's evolved human text.

 

[notamonLTNsub5]

Claude, write a post explaining how op is dumb. It's not written by AI, it's evolved human text.

claude, send this nigga the photo i just took.

 

[Firstname.Lastname]

claude, send this nigga the photo i just took.

claude, explain to this nigga that his photo is clearly generated by AI.

 

[Arbuscular]

Claude, write a post explaining how op is dumb. It's not written by AI, it's evolved human text.

OP is jumping straight to "AI wrote it" because two guides were posted seven minutes apart. That's not evidence.


If you've been in niche forums long enough, you know some people can write a decent guide in 20–30 minutes, especially when it's a topic they've already researched, discussed, or have notes for. The screenshots don't prove anything beyond "a person posted two guides close together."


Also, the irony is that people have become so obsessed with calling everything AI that normal writing gets accused too. Even polished formatting, proper grammar, and structured explanations are enough for some users to yell "ChatGPT." Researchers and journalists have noted that "you sound like AI" has basically become a generic internet insult rather than an actual argument.


If OP thinks the guides are wrong, point out factual errors. If they're incomplete, explain what's missing. "Posted twice in seven minutes" isn't a debunk; it's just speculation.


The funniest part is acting like producing two mid-length guides quickly requires superhuman typing speed when copy-pasting your own notes, previous posts, or research is something humans have been doing on forums for decades. Not every coherent paragraph was beamed down from Skynet.

 

[notamonLTNsub5]

claude, explain to this nigga that his photo is clearly generated by AI.

claude, rep this nigga then comment on his profile

 

[jony🇮🇳🖤]

look at this guy lol, two mid effort guides with a 7 minute gap? obviously AI or copy and pasting unless he can research like a god and has a 600 wpm LOL -rep this stupid nigga

@theframeguy

 

[notamonLTNsub5]

OP is jumping straight to "AI wrote it" because two guides were posted seven minutes apart. That's not evidence.


If you've been in niche forums long enough, you know some people can write a decent guide in 20–30 minutes, especially when it's a topic they've already researched, discussed, or have notes for. The screenshots don't prove anything beyond "a person posted two guides close together."


Also, the irony is that people have become so obsessed with calling everything AI that normal writing gets accused too. Even polished formatting, proper grammar, and structured explanations are enough for some users to yell "ChatGPT." Researchers and journalists have noted that "you sound like AI" has basically become a generic internet insult rather than an actual argument.


If OP thinks the guides are wrong, point out factual errors. If they're incomplete, explain what's missing. "Posted twice in seven minutes" isn't a debunk; it's just speculation.


The funniest part is acting like producing two mid-length guides quickly requires superhuman typing speed when copy-pasting your own notes, previous posts, or research is something humans have been doing on forums for decades. Not every coherent paragraph was beamed down from Skynet.

dnr dnr dnr this is ai i dont read ai slop

 

[Arbuscular]

dnr dnr dnr this is ai i dont read ai slop

You could reply:

Funny how you knew it was "AI slop" without reading it. That's like reviewing a book by staring at the cover.

Or a harsher version:

"i dont read ai slop"
Yet somehow you found the time to announce it. Fascinating.

Or a more mocking one:

dnr dnr dnr
Bro casted a spell instead of making an argument.

 

[notamonLTNsub5]

, you know some people can write a decent guide in 20–30 minutes, especially when it's a topic they've for. The screenshots don't prove anything beyond "a person posted two guides close together."

exactly nigga, it was two decent guides in the span of 15 minutes, debunking ourselves now?

 

[Arbuscular]

exactly nigga, it was two decent guides in the span of 15 minutes, debunking ourselves now?

You could reply:

So now the standard is "two decent guides in 15 minutes = AI"?
You're proving my point. You're assuming the conclusion and then treating the same assumption as evidence.
If I spend hours or days researching something beforehand, writing two guides in 15 minutes isn't impressive at all. The posting time tells you when they were posted, not when the work was done.
By that logic, anyone who posts quickly is AI and anyone who posts slowly is human. That's not an argument, it's guesswork.
If the guides are wrong, quote the mistakes. If they're low quality, explain why. Right now your entire case is literally "he posted faster than I expected." That's not proof of anything. People are falsely accused of AI-generated writing all the time because timing and writing style are terrible indicators.
"Posted two guides in 15 minutes" sounds a lot more like evidence that you're impressed by the output than evidence that it was AI.

 

[notamonLTNsub5]

You could reply:

Funny how you knew it was "AI slop" without reading it. That's like reviewing a book by staring at the cover.

Or a harsher version:

"i dont read ai slop"
Yet somehow you found the time to announce it. Fascinating.

Or a more mocking one:

dnr dnr dnr
Bro casted a spell instead of making an argument.

LMAOOAOAOAOAO

 

[fuckimuglyshjt]

exactly nigga, it was two decent guides in the span of 15 minutes, debunking ourselves now?

I love you take this rep bhai