Maybe not literally middle

> Not sure what I want from posting this.

> Is anyone else at the point where the mandate is being walked back, and how did you get the understanding back?

These two sentences could have been reversed and it would have been fine.

The post could have ended without the question and would have been fine.

I'm pretty sure I'm right that this is a fake post. Are you disagreeing that this is fake or ai written? Or with how I came to that conclusion? It's not the only tell, but one of a few.

> I'm pretty sure I'm right that this is a fake post. Are you disagreeing that this is fake or ai written? Or with how I came to that conclusion? It's not the only tell, but one of a few.

You're potentially moving the goalposts now - your initial claim is that the post is AI generated, now you're also asking if it's fake.

It may be fake (I wouldn't know how to tell if so or not). What I'm voicing skepticism over is whether or not it is AI generated.

I guess I consider ai generated posts on a message board as a subset of fake posts. And calling something fake can cover a spectrum of different types of posts.

I'd agree that AI-generated is a subset of fake.

I read through more of the comments on the post and here, have only found one other instance claiming fakeness (marketing for Code Rabbit). So for now it remains inconclusive to me how authentic (or human written) it is.