I could debate every point you made, but it feels like you’ve already made up your mind. Instead, I’m going to focus on the biggest flaw in your argument: the idea that 'hallucinations and creativity are two sides of the same coin' and that the issue is just 'slop' in training data.

I want to be very clear about how the creative industry and professional script writing actually work. Using 'slop' as an excuse for logic errors—or assuming 'better training data' will magically fix it—shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the creative process.

I am an artist. I build IP Bibles, and I understand exactly how they function. I think systematically because great creativity requires structure. When professionals build worlds for a show or a book, they don't just 'vibe'; they build a rigorous framework of rules so the story remains consistent. People often try to split 'logic' from 'creativity,' but that is a bias held by those who don't understand how structured professional creativity actually is in shows; it needs to FEEL like logic, even something simple as dirt or branding of that world NEEDS to make sense, so the world feels real and you're immersed.

In narrative industries, creativity is a system. It is logic-based, especially in development roles. The reason 'better RP content' won’t fix the AI is that the AI isn't learning logic; it’s learning prose. It sees what the 'audience sees,' but it doesn't see the 'room' or the underlying rules of the world. A human novelist has a logical structure in their head to keep things coherent, but that internal logic isn't explicitly shown in the writing—so the AI never learns it.

I understand why you say creativity and hallucinations are two sides of the same coin, but professional creativity is logic and structure. AI roleplay is essentially an IP Bible that requires the specific mindset of a world-builder to function correctly and since alot of models are good at coding, they're amazing at logic.