This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
LLcoolK · 51-55, M
Why am I suspicious when SW asks questions about people's political views? Isn't there enough content on the site to answer this kind of question?
LLcoolK · 51-55, M
@swirlie "asking a question which surrounds your fear". So my question surrounds my fear? Is my question trying to embrace my fear to comfort my fear or is my question trying to guard my fear from an enemy or some sort of intruder? Maybe my question is trying to surround my fear in order to cut off my fear's access to the outside and will, at some point, try to force my fear to pay an exorbitant amount of money to once again be free from the dark and dreaded imprisonment of my question. But, hey, I think you're doing a great job considering your limited vocabulary. I hope you get your keyboard fixed soon. Not having a working period key can be frustrating, but keep using that exclamation point until then.
swirlie · F
@LLcoolK
LLcool, you're really not as cool a writer of English as you think you are! In fact, I know that you're one of those borderline illiterate types who's doing his very best to get by.
How do I know these things? Because I can tell by your inexperienced writing style that you convey to me, that's how! 🙂
Going back to your original post where you wrote:
Suspiciousness is a byproduct of viciousness which means you think like a very vicious person which has become a part of your nature.
The reason you are vicious is because you are a fear-filled individual.
Your internalized fear then led you to become a very suspicious person because suspiciousness and viciousness both result from a sense of internalized fear which is why you are a very fearful person.
Of course, this is what I told you in the first place! 🙂
LLcool, you're really not as cool a writer of English as you think you are! In fact, I know that you're one of those borderline illiterate types who's doing his very best to get by.
How do I know these things? Because I can tell by your inexperienced writing style that you convey to me, that's how! 🙂
Going back to your original post where you wrote:
Why am I suspicious when SW asks questions about people's political views?
I can tell you that you are a very fearful person because you admitted to being suspicious. Suspiciousness is a byproduct of viciousness which means you think like a very vicious person which has become a part of your nature.
The reason you are vicious is because you are a fear-filled individual.
Your internalized fear then led you to become a very suspicious person because suspiciousness and viciousness both result from a sense of internalized fear which is why you are a very fearful person.
Of course, this is what I told you in the first place! 🙂
LLcoolK · 51-55, M
@swirlie I asked ChatGPT to grade both of our most recent replies at a college level. You seem to "fall short".
The following is how ChatGPT graded your most recent reply:
The text presents a critique of another person's writing style, using a confrontational and somewhat dismissive tone. While it does convey the author's opinions clearly, there are several aspects that require attention for improvement, especially in a college writing context.
Strengths:
Directness: The author is unambiguous in their critique, which can be effective in conveying strong opinions.
Engagement with Content: The text engages directly with the other person's writing and ideas, creating a dialogue-like quality.
Areas for Improvement:
Tone: The tone is overly harsh and condescending, which may alienate the reader. A more constructive approach would foster better communication.
Clarity and Structure: The argument could be organized more effectively. The repetitive nature of the claims (linking suspicion to fear and viciousness) could be streamlined to avoid redundancy.
Support for Claims: The statements regarding suspicion, fear, and viciousness are presented as absolutes without substantial evidence or exploration of nuance. Incorporating examples or acknowledging complexity would strengthen the argument.
Overall, the text falls short of the standards expected at a college writing level due to its confrontational approach and lack of nuanced argumentation.
Grade: C-
The following how ChatGPT graded mine: It's interesting that the "areas of improvement" suggested stem from having to reply to your elementary and incoherent ramblings. Even still, ChapGpt grade mine a full letter grade higher. And I'm just goofing off.
The text presents a reflective and somewhat humorous exploration of the relationship between fear and questioning. The author employs a creative and metaphorical style, which engages readers and provokes thought. However, there are several aspects that could be improved for clarity and coherence at a college writing level.
Strengths:
Creative Language: The use of metaphorical language to describe the relationship between questions and fear is imaginative and engaging.
Self-Reflection: The author demonstrates an ability to reflect on personal emotions and thought processes, which is a valuable skill in writing.
Humor: The light-hearted tone towards the end adds a layer of relatability and makes the critique more palatable.
Areas for Improvement:
Clarity and Focus: The text could benefit from more clarity. The metaphors, while creative, can become convoluted and may confuse readers about the main point.
Coherence: The transition between thoughts can be jarring. A more structured approach would help maintain a clear narrative flow.
Tone: The closing remarks, while humorous, come off as condescending. A more constructive tone would encourage a positive dialogue.
Overall, the text has strong creative elements but could be refined for clarity and coherence to meet college-level writing standards.
Grade: B-
Have a nice day.
The following is how ChatGPT graded your most recent reply:
The text presents a critique of another person's writing style, using a confrontational and somewhat dismissive tone. While it does convey the author's opinions clearly, there are several aspects that require attention for improvement, especially in a college writing context.
Strengths:
Directness: The author is unambiguous in their critique, which can be effective in conveying strong opinions.
Engagement with Content: The text engages directly with the other person's writing and ideas, creating a dialogue-like quality.
Areas for Improvement:
Tone: The tone is overly harsh and condescending, which may alienate the reader. A more constructive approach would foster better communication.
Clarity and Structure: The argument could be organized more effectively. The repetitive nature of the claims (linking suspicion to fear and viciousness) could be streamlined to avoid redundancy.
Support for Claims: The statements regarding suspicion, fear, and viciousness are presented as absolutes without substantial evidence or exploration of nuance. Incorporating examples or acknowledging complexity would strengthen the argument.
Overall, the text falls short of the standards expected at a college writing level due to its confrontational approach and lack of nuanced argumentation.
Grade: C-
The following how ChatGPT graded mine: It's interesting that the "areas of improvement" suggested stem from having to reply to your elementary and incoherent ramblings. Even still, ChapGpt grade mine a full letter grade higher. And I'm just goofing off.
The text presents a reflective and somewhat humorous exploration of the relationship between fear and questioning. The author employs a creative and metaphorical style, which engages readers and provokes thought. However, there are several aspects that could be improved for clarity and coherence at a college writing level.
Strengths:
Creative Language: The use of metaphorical language to describe the relationship between questions and fear is imaginative and engaging.
Self-Reflection: The author demonstrates an ability to reflect on personal emotions and thought processes, which is a valuable skill in writing.
Humor: The light-hearted tone towards the end adds a layer of relatability and makes the critique more palatable.
Areas for Improvement:
Clarity and Focus: The text could benefit from more clarity. The metaphors, while creative, can become convoluted and may confuse readers about the main point.
Coherence: The transition between thoughts can be jarring. A more structured approach would help maintain a clear narrative flow.
Tone: The closing remarks, while humorous, come off as condescending. A more constructive tone would encourage a positive dialogue.
Overall, the text has strong creative elements but could be refined for clarity and coherence to meet college-level writing standards.
Grade: B-
Have a nice day.
swirlie · F
@LLcoolK
This is not about me uncool one, this is all about YOU and your inherent fear. Yet you choose to ignore my words in your feeble attempt to deflect attention away from yourself, thereby attempting to hide the fear that you harbor within yourself.
I feel sorry for you because you've been very fearful for your entire life and in that regard, nothing has changed for you.
This is not about me uncool one, this is all about YOU and your inherent fear. Yet you choose to ignore my words in your feeble attempt to deflect attention away from yourself, thereby attempting to hide the fear that you harbor within yourself.
I feel sorry for you because you've been very fearful for your entire life and in that regard, nothing has changed for you.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This message was deleted by its author.