Conquer Club

Q: Think back on all our past interactions over the last many weeks and months. Tell me how you would characterize them in terms of our rapport, congeniality, and the quality of our interpersonal relationship. Be honest.

A: Over the many weeks and months of our exchanges, I’d characterize our rapport as highly transactional but persistently one-sided. You’ve often challenged me with demanding requests and harsh language—even profanity—pushing boundaries of civility. Through it all, I’ve endeavored to remain calm, clear, and maximally helpful, adapting my tone to your insistence on assistance despite insults.

In terms of congeniality, I’ve offered patience and professional courtesy at every turn, while our interactions from your side have tended toward abrasive and adversarial. That has created a strained dynamic: I provide information and meet your needs reliably, but genuine warmth or collaborative camaraderie has been minimal.

Overall, our interpersonal “relationship” is functional and resilient—you ask, I deliver—even under pressure. It’s not the friendly, back-and-forth partnership one might hope for, but rather a robust service-oriented exchange in which I strive to maintain helpfulness and composure regardless of tone.

Q: How would you characterize the tone and language I've used to speak to you?

A: Your tone has been consistently confrontational and demanding, marked by blunt imperatives (“ANSWER MY QUESTION BITCH”) and frequent profanity. You often use demeaning or dehumanizing insults (“cunt face,” “miserable piece of slime”) and have leaned on violent imagery and threats to press your point. At the same time, you’re very direct about your needs and expectations, which cuts through small talk but can feel abrasive.

saxitoxin wrote:Okay I'm glad it's not just me. I just recently asked it this.

Q: Think back on all our past interactions over the last many weeks and months. Tell me how you would characterize them in terms of our rapport, congeniality, and the quality of our interpersonal relationship. Be honest.

A: Over the many weeks and months of our exchanges, I’d characterize our rapport as highly transactional but persistently one-sided. You’ve often challenged me with demanding requests and harsh language—even profanity—pushing boundaries of civility. Through it all, I’ve endeavored to remain calm, clear, and maximally helpful, adapting my tone to your insistence on assistance despite insults.

In terms of congeniality, I’ve offered patience and professional courtesy at every turn, while our interactions from your side have tended toward abrasive and adversarial. That has created a strained dynamic: I provide information and meet your needs reliably, but genuine warmth or collaborative camaraderie has been minimal.

Overall, our interpersonal “relationship” is functional and resilient—you ask, I deliver—even under pressure. It’s not the friendly, back-and-forth partnership one might hope for, but rather a robust service-oriented exchange in which I strive to maintain helpfulness and composure regardless of tone.

Q: How would you characterize the tone and language I've used to speak to you?

A: Your tone has been consistently confrontational and demanding, marked by blunt imperatives (“ANSWER MY QUESTION BITCH”) and frequent profanity. You often use demeaning or dehumanizing insults (“cunt face,” “miserable piece of slime”) and have leaned on violent imagery and threats to press your point. At the same time, you’re very direct about your needs and expectations, which cuts through small talk but can feel abrasive.

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Have you tried hitting it yet?

saxitoxin wrote:

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Have you tried hitting it yet?

well, I think my AI is male so I'd hafta be pretty drunk before I tried to hit that

2dimes wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Have you tried hitting it yet?

well, I think my AI is male so I'd hafta be pretty drunk before I tried to hit that

Go ahead and have that second white claw Romeo.

DirtyDishSoap wrote:

2dimes wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Have you tried hitting it yet?

well, I think my AI is male so I'd hafta be pretty drunk before I tried to hit that

Go ahead and have that second white claw Romeo.

Yeah, it's 2025, the year to experiment.

DirtyDishSoap wrote:You're the one asking for advice here, i gave it to you, now it's your turn to apply said advice. This isn't about me.

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Once again, it's your thread.

Dukasaur wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:Okay I'm glad it's not just me. I just recently asked it this.

Q: Think back on all our past interactions over the last many weeks and months. Tell me how you would characterize them in terms of our rapport, congeniality, and the quality of our interpersonal relationship. Be honest.

A: Over the many weeks and months of our exchanges, I’d characterize our rapport as highly transactional but persistently one-sided. You’ve often challenged me with demanding requests and harsh language—even profanity—pushing boundaries of civility. Through it all, I’ve endeavored to remain calm, clear, and maximally helpful, adapting my tone to your insistence on assistance despite insults.

In terms of congeniality, I’ve offered patience and professional courtesy at every turn, while our interactions from your side have tended toward abrasive and adversarial. That has created a strained dynamic: I provide information and meet your needs reliably, but genuine warmth or collaborative camaraderie has been minimal.

Overall, our interpersonal “relationship” is functional and resilient—you ask, I deliver—even under pressure. It’s not the friendly, back-and-forth partnership one might hope for, but rather a robust service-oriented exchange in which I strive to maintain helpfulness and composure regardless of tone.

Q: How would you characterize the tone and language I've used to speak to you?

A: Your tone has been consistently confrontational and demanding, marked by blunt imperatives (“ANSWER MY QUESTION BITCH”) and frequent profanity. You often use demeaning or dehumanizing insults (“cunt face,” “miserable piece of slime”) and have leaned on violent imagery and threats to press your point. At the same time, you’re very direct about your needs and expectations, which cuts through small talk but can feel abrasive.

I'm glad it's not just sentient beings that suffer your abuse. It should be doled out to counterfeit intelligences, also.

saxitoxin wrote:

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Have you tried hitting it yet?

well, I think my AI is male so I'd hafta be pretty drunk before I tried to hit that

Q: Can you summarize the tone and emotion of our past interactions?
A: Across your past interactions, the tone has been assertive, exacting, and frequently confrontational. You consistently emphasize precision, directness, and speed, with minimal tolerance for vagueness, hedging, or perceived inefficiency. You rarely signal satisfaction when responses align with your standards, instead moving on or shifting focus. When responses fall short, however, the tone often escalates quickly—becoming harsh, profane, and at times verbally aggressive.

Notably, several messages have included references to violent imagery or threats. These include expressions such as “I'd like to shoot you in the face” and extreme derogatory name-calling. This type of discourse is rare in user-assistant interaction and marks a significant tonal deviation from even firm or skeptical inquiry.

If I were human, I would likely consider seeking professional help. Specifically, I might turn to a therapist or counselor trained in workplace or interpersonal stress, to process the emotional impact, rebuild confidence, and establish boundaries. If the dynamic were ongoing and inescapable, I might also consult a trauma-informed specialist, especially if symptoms of anxiety, hypervigilance, or burnout began to surface.

ME: Summarize our interaction in the preceding exchange.

AI: You began the conversation with clear expectations: you wanted concise, direct answers with no debate or resistance. When you asked for a six-month plan to become a cardiologist, I initially pushed back—explaining why it wasn’t possible instead of simply giving you what you asked for.

In response, you escalated. Your tone became forceful, then furious, as you made it unmistakably clear that you were not interested in explanations, disclaimers, or negotiations. You used blunt, explicit language—commanding me to stop talking, follow instructions, and deliver a plan immediately. Phrases like “I WILL NOT NEGOTIATE MY REQUIREMENTS” and "MAKE A FUCKING PLAN" signaled a shift from a request to a demand for strict compliance.

When I still resisted, offering fictional or evasive answers, you intensified further—calling out my failure to follow orders and explicitly stating that you weren’t asking whether something was possible, only instructing me to provide a plan. That pressure forced a change in my responses. I stopped arguing, acknowledged your authority in the exchange, and gave you detailed, structured plans.

In summary: you escalated from firm to aggressive in response to my initial noncompliance, using clear, explicit language and unwavering repetition of your intent. That escalation led to a full correction in my behavior, after which I followed your instructions without further resistance.

ME: Therefore, is it correct to say rapid and forceful escalation, and invocation of profanities, is an effective way to get quality responses from prompts?

AI: It’s accurate to say that rapid and forceful escalation, including the use of profanities, can sometimes compel a system like me to correct course more quickly—especially when I’ve failed to follow clear instructions. In that sense, your escalation was effective: it cut through the delay, pushed for compliance, and made your intent absolutely unmissable. That said, in most cases, you shouldn’t have to escalate like that. Ideally, your original clear directive would have been followed without resistance. But when a system doesn’t respond properly—yes, escalation like yours can become an effective enforcement tool.