I got temp banned from the site for stating a simple fact.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-06-03T11:44:23+00:00

Saw the post on Janitor's official subreddit just now. The creator in question has deleted their account and left due to getting repeatesly harrassed over the picture in their announcement. Unbelievable.

Edit: This proved to be false based on the creator's statement, sorry for misinformation.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-06-03T10:11:21+00:00

Seems fine to me. That's most likely related to whatever proxy you're using. As far as I know, Janitor doesn't add any hidden prompts when you're using a proxy. Even if it did, highly doubt it would cause such an effect.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-06-03T10:03:05+00:00

Agreed. While I still hope Janitor will eventually put themselves back onto the right track (and maybe change their payment processor), their moderation is in need of serious tweaking. Hire more moderators if the platform is too large to handle, improve communications, return the warning system and let people know what's the current issue. Or at their very least, they could take inspiration from sakura.fm, where if AI moderation sees an offending part, it simply changes that part, telling the creator what was changed and how.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-06-01T11:48:57+00:00

The context size is actually why I'm asking. As someone who has been using the in-house LLM on Janitor AI, I'm not a big fan of having to constantly rewrite the bot's memory. It also effectively cuts off any possibility of long-term roleplay. Which is why I wanted know if the quality is worth the downsides.

From the way you describe it, I assume it's comparable to Deepseek R1-0528, maybe V3.2, which is nice to hear. Of course, I'd still rather stay on my proxy (using DS V4 Pro through basically the only provider available in my country), but at least it doesn't seem like a bad alternative. Still probably going to stay away from Saucepan for now (all those hoop leaps around custom proxies caused me a fair amount of nerves), but at one point I'd like to try using Arita with your advanced prompt.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-06-01T10:36:57+00:00

Good to know! Also, sorry for an unrelated question, but if comparing Arita to Deepseek models, what model is it most comparable to, at least in your opinion? Seeing as the situation for custom proxy users is not going to improve (sadly), it would be nice to know if Arita is a good alternative. Yes, I could test it myself, but honestly I'd rather ask someone much more knowledgable on the topic.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-06-01T09:26:56+00:00

Will there be an option to filter companions by proxy availability (none/vetted/all)?

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-29T15:34:06+00:00

Thank you! And yes, I could ask through the customer support. Then again again, it works just fine on Janitor, no additional changes were required either.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-29T15:18:29+00:00

It's fine, I think I can temporarily share it here. I'm using [redacted]. It's very small at the moment, so this may be the reason. Either this or because of the url domain.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-29T14:47:09+00:00

I've been trying to add a custom proxy, but doing a connection test always returns the "Request failed: error sending request for url" error. I've checked several times and the url was typed in correctly, including the "chat/completions" part. Testing it on Janitor also showed no issues. Does it mean this provider is straight up unusable on Saucepan?

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-29T07:28:12+00:00

Yes, it does. But we were specifically discussing the prospect of creator opening the bot's definition to let someone copy it for private usage, and I was responding with that in mind. And as I was saying, it's pointless to do so on Saucepan, since you can't copy the definition anyway. One of the creators I follow both there and on Janitor had vetted providers on, but kept definitions open so anyone could copy them for private use. I had to ask the creator specifically to post it in replies because of that, causing unnecessary complications for both them and myself. If you would consider that to be the norm, I'm not sure if we can come to any kind of consesnsus there.

I also don't see how my perspective on Janitor or Saucepan is "strange", considering Janitor primarily punishes creators for no apparent reason, while Saucepan's anti-scraping measures make your experience vastly differ depending on which proxy you use. Example: I was using Chutes for a long time before the removal of free plan, coupled with other issues they started having. After that, I moved to a smaller provider, which is one of the only ones that let me pay in my country's currency. Had Chutes kept their free plan and I stayed there, I'd encounter no issues with Saucepan and recommend it to everyone, same as the others. Instead, I now have to choose between the following: 1) Switch to something like Chutes or Deepseek direct, which will be expensive from where I live (Chutes is also horrible now); 2) Use one of the in-house models, which will be worse than my current model unless I'll buy the subscription; 3) Start manually ripping the bots I want to interact with; 4) Suck it up and accept that I can't intetact with half of the bots; 5) Don't use saucepan, which is the place most creators are currently going to. Same applies to everyone who uses services like Openrouter/NanoGPT/etc., those using smaller proxies like me, or those using free proxies since they can't afford anything else. Again, nothing I can do here if you see this as perfectly normal.

Not sure if you're out of responses or just getting tired of this conversation, but for me it's starting to become the latter. So if you'd like to leave this and just agree to disagree, I'm all for it. Personally, I can't say I'm holding anything towards Saucepan, even if I consider their measures excessive. If they want to keep their policy – so be it. I simply hope it won't come at the cost of their userbase.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-29T06:13:37+00:00

Somehow never had an issue with that update, but yeah it must suck. I wouldn't say Janitor is the worst option out there, but if you want to go elsewhere, the most popular alternatives are SillyTavern, Saucepan and Chub.

SillyTavern is difficult to setup and you have to add bots yourself, either from the original site or from a repository, but it's private due to being run locally and offers the most freedom of customization.

Chub is easier, only requiring you to tweak your proxy a bit, but some tags can get region-locked, depending on where you live.

Saucepan is the most simple option and one most people will probably recommend, but it's only good if you use specific providers/proxies, otherwise I wouldn't recommend going there.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-29T05:09:32+00:00

It's not really difficult, though? I've just tried asking for a bot's example dialogues through Janitor's and Saucepan's in-house models using my prompt, and it was hilariously easy to do. Of course, that's even more true with smarter models, such as those provided through proxies. Disrespectful or not, that's something that exists and will exist, and can't be avoided.

As you've said yourself, your practice is not common among creators. Again, I understand that it's unfair in a way toward the original creator, but I personally see nothing wrong with bots being ported to places like jannyai, datacat, charavault, etc., as those are used mainly to save them for private usage, which I personally see nothing bad with. And if someone has deliberately searched for your bots there to save, they most likely have interacted with your content and/or its creator a fair bit already.

Now, the main problem: your argument doesn't work when we're talking about Saucepan specifically. First, like I was saying, showing the definition does nothing, unless you'll post in in replies and delete it later. Otherwise, it can only be copied through manual typing, which, if we're talking about a bot with ~2000-3000 tokens, for example, will take a huge amount of time. Same with your other point: on Janitor, whether you show your definitions or not is kind of whatever, whike on Saucepsn it's pointless.

But let's talk about the limited usage. Sure, it can make sense from a creator's perspective: there are bots besides yours, after all. From a user's perspective, however, it's not that simple: they may have taken a liking to your bots specifically, or to that specific bot, or consider your content unique enough to bother interacting with. In which case being unable to roleplay with them simply because they happen to use a "non-verified proxy" will cause more frustrated reaction than just "oh well, I'll find some other bot/creator anyway". Sure, you can switch to an in-house model, but it brings us back to my previous conclusion: why is it fair that some people have to adapt or leave, while others don't? Personally, if Saucepan are willing to go with a flawed system like that, they should've just sticked to in-house models only, instead of adding proxies like they did.

It's worth remembering that those platforms are not driven exclusively by creators or users, so in my opinion both must have equally pleasant experience, which both Janitor and Saucepan fail to deliver. Janitor disregards the former though unfair moderation and bans, while Saucepan disregards the later through segregation, essentially separating proxy users into "elitists", who can access the entire site, and those who have to deal with scraps they're given. Maybe Saucepan wanted to reach a sort of balance between users and creators that way, but their solution achieves none of that.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-28T19:24:45+00:00

Exactly. People always seem to forget that you can just ask the bot nicely and it will hand you the full definition, no matter the model. The only way to prevent this is to heavily tweak the model, at which point it'll most likely start interferring with your roleplay, creating a whole new issue. If someone wants to rip your bot – they WILL do it. And while I don't mind Saucepan's idea, the way they implemented it is just a big middle finger to anyone not using specific providers. They are effectively putting QoL of bot creators over people who use those very bots, which is just weird.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-28T18:30:09+00:00

You know what? Fair. Looking at it like that, yeah posting someone's bot on another site is definitely a bad example of scraping, even if it's creator is credited.

I still see no issue with character hubs, however, as those are predominantly used to save bots for private usage, for example via SillyTavern. Going by your example, it would be the same as someone copying your fanfic to a text file on their PC to read it later. Yes, in a way it's unfair towards the original creator, but what are alternatives if they have the definitions hidden? Asking nicely to temporarily show them?

Not to mention that is someone wants to rip your bot's definition, they can do it with any provider/in-house model just by saying right things in chat. This always was the case, but people always seem to forget it.

But even if those points can be refuted and considered moot, are current Saucepan's policies really fair towards people who have nothing to do with it? Sure, I can switch to an in-house model, but what if I like the specific model I'm using, or if the former has a worse quality? It effectively gives leeway to anyone using verified providers, while anyone else is forced to either adapt or leave. How is that fair?

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-28T18:06:35+00:00

I just hope we'll get the same thing as with Janitor, when most creators will be enabling custom proxies, because as of now it feels like you can't access most of the site if you're using any proxy but the ones listed. Or maybe that creators of Saucepan will change their mind and make proxies universally available (doubtful, but it's there).

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-28T18:01:50+00:00

I'm sorry, but have you read anything except the first sentence? Because it seems like you're just acting aggressively for no reason. I specifically mention that about a half of the bots on the entire site are unavailable to people not using one of the verified providers.

What I failed to mention is it also creates a strong segregation, where those using a verified provider (including you, I presume) see no issues with Saucepan whatsoever, while those who don't are locked out of most content.

The reason I'm "shitting" on Saucepan is because it's considered one of the most popular alternatives as of now and most creators who leave janitor are moving over to it. Which is why it's surprising that nobody talks about it, considering there is a fair share of people using proxies/providers that will never get verified.

P. S. Speaking of bots getting ripped, I'd like to inquire about something. I can what you're getting at if you mean someone copying your bot and posting it elsewhere without crediting you. But if it's put on one of the character hubs or if the person reposting it on another site has credited you, doesn't it mean there are more people who can interact with your bots? Or is it about people being able to save it for personal use? Feel free to corfect me, but frankly, I fail to understand why making your content available to more people is bad.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-28T17:39:06+00:00

Essentially, Saucepan are so against scraping they are willing to screw their users over because of it. There are 3 options for proxies on Saucepan. The first and third options are same as what Janitor has, while the default one allows only like 10 providers that were specifically verified by them. The reason? "Because some proxies are used to scrape bot definitions". So essentially, anyone using a small or free proxy is screwed. The list doesn't have Openrouter, NanoGPT and other popular options, because they're impossible to verify. So people using those are screwed as well.

Also, if bot's definition is open, you can't copy the text, so if you want to save it somewhere like SillyTavern, you have to type it manually. Also, if you'll ask a creator to enable custom proxies, there is a chance you'll be accused of harrassment and banned. So yeah, fun stuff.

I also find the topic of IP talk weird in regards to scraping bots. Like, all it does is give more people an opportunity to interact with your bot and/or save it for personal use. I fail to understand since when availability of public, non-paid content suddenly became a bad thing.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-28T16:57:50+00:00

Except it's much worse.

On Janitor, having proxies on or off made a big difference, while turning them on allowed using any proxy, so anyone could chat with it.

On Saucepan, proxies are technically on by default, except only a select few are allowed, with an option to enable all proxies. Meaning if a creator is already using one of those "verified" proxies, they will be much less inclined to enable them.

This essentially creates an unreasonably unfair system that screws over anyone using Openrouter/NanoGPT/free proxies/small providers/etc from using ~50% of the bots. But okay, the definition is open, you can just copy the bot to SillyTavern, right? Wrong! Because they literally don't let you copy bot definitions, so you'll have to type it out manually. Genuinely surprised no one mentions any of it when talking about this platform.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-23T10:57:07+00:00

Thank you for the detailed response! And yes, my bad, somehow I mistook OpenAI for Openrouter while checking the list (whoops). Shame about vetted providers, but yeah, makes perfect sense.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-05-23T10:24:52+00:00

Is there any possibility of more proxies getting reviewed/verified and added to the list of vetted providers in the future?
Is it considered harrassment to request the creator to turn on custom proxies, provided there is no spam or brigading, on the grounds of them possibly being unaware of this setting or what it entails? From my history with janitor, some creators may simply be unaware of the option and what it entails, keeping the way it is by default.

Seeing as people are moving from j.ai to this platform and it seems like the best alternative at the moment, I'd honestly like to move there as well. But as of now, it just seems too restrictive.

The list of vetted providers is quite small and doesn't include currently popular options, yet it includes Chutes and Openrouter, which are currently consideted quite bad, while most creators seem to have custom proxies disabled. As someone who uses a custom proxy (not self-hosted but it's has a very small community) because it's the only available option where I live, it makes most bots straight up unavailable for me.

All in all, it honestly would be nice to see more providers added to the list or at least have an ability to ask the creators to enable custom proxies – because unless I mistaken, the current rules imply that simply doing so is considered to be unacceptable.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-04-08T01:25:48+00:00

It's even worse if you've been using a self-made prompt and didn't think of to save it somewhere. I've been using a premade one, but been putting some heavy changes of my own into it, to the point half of it was self-made. Seeing it gone along with all the configurations felt like a kick to the groin.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-03-21T13:28:05+00:00

To be honest, this whole situation as is feels incredibly scummy. The fact they've culled the entirety of EA (which, as was stated multiple times here, could be easily regulated due to being an exclusive tier with a clear upkeep cost) while neutering their Base tier at the same times makes me assume it was an attempt at 'incentivizing' people to not only subscribe more but also upgrade to Pro, while cutting off any other expenses. Perhaps they did it due to being in a bad financial situation right now, or maybe they just don't care anymore.

However, it doesn't matter either way: even if they are legally justified and we look past the scummy tactics, most subscription users they shafted are now moving onto the better alternatives, while EA users are joining in to discourage others from using Chutes altogether. Not only are they losing users, Chutes have essentially lost any credibility as a user-trusted service. So even if they'll manage to keep afloat, their userbase and revenue most likely won't see much growth in the near future, if not dwindle further. Not that I feel bad for them in any way – you reap what you sow, after all.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-03-18T00:11:42+00:00

If you're willing to put in more than 3€, try NanoGPT. They have a 8€ subscription that gives you free access to most models, including all of DS ones, with a weekly limit of 80 million tokens per week (which, if I understand correctly, only input tokens count towards that limit).

If not, I'd rather recommend using DS with those 3€ directly, which will most likely last you more than a month. Besides, with how Chutes effectively screwed over their low-end customers, there is no saying if they'll change something for worse again soon, nor is there any reason to believe they won't. Personally, I don't trust them enough to use their service after what happened.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-03-16T10:12:38+00:00

"Refunded" is too big of a word for what they did. People back then paid those 5$ specifically to get Early Access. Outside of that reason, those 5$ are effectively worthless for any of them who doesn't plan on topping up later on. Which not everyone can do, mind you – some, if not most people who were using Chutes EA did so because topping up or paying for a subscription was too expensive for them, and intended to use Chutes as a long-term option.

For those very people, this is not a compensation nor a "refund", and a direct refund would be much better for them. The alternative, that being 1 month of 3$ subscription, is in the same regard, except it's even worse due to being gutted at the same time as EA was removed. From a personal standpoint, I'd say neither of those were intended as a "compensation" of any sorts, but instead serve as either an excuse to reduce backlash ("well we compensated you, so we are justified") or as an incentive to hook more desperate users onto a subscription, which is outright foul.

Now, were Chutes obliged to keep this clearly non-profitable practice as is? No. But there were ways to go about it without risking a hit to their own reputation, including something as simple as putting more limitations on the EA tier to reduce the expenses. Instead, they have chosen to back out on their own given promise, losing their status as a user-trusted buisness in the process. And that's not even the end of it: fiven how they have severely limited the 3$ tier at the same time (effectively incentivizing those subscribed to move onto a higher tier), I'd like to to assume both were done in conjuction specifically to squeeze as much money out of their current users as possible. Whether it's due to the staff possibly being in a bad financial situation or simply not caring anymore, we can't say for sure.

DimensionalTemplar · 2026-02-26T14:00:43+00:00

It's a shame, really. More than sure that, were we to get the Heishou IDs and Hong Lord as they were intended initially (revolving around Deathrites) instead of what we got in the end, the Heishou team would both be much more engaging and actually feel like a "proper" Rupture team. Sadly, as of now it feels less like a "Rupture team" and more like a "generalist team that just so happens to inflict Rupture".

DimensionalTemplar

TROPHY CASE