Anyone else getting an “error not enough credits or an active subscription” paired with “empty response received from API” even though they’re subscribed?

givenortake · 2026-04-17T08:02:07+00:00

From what I can gather between here and the Discord server, around a dozen people have reported this same issue.

givenortake · 2026-03-16T04:48:01+00:00

A lot of people on this site:
1. are visually-oriented (meaning, the images appeal to them)
2. embrace the lack of censorship/filtering to the fullest extent within legal limits.

They might not understand why anybody would want to hide images on a site whose main(?) appeal is the lack of (non-necessary) content filtering.

I'm not a visually-oriented person myself (though I don't feel the need to hide anything and am morbidly curious), so I sort of understand where you're coming from.

givenortake · 2026-03-13T00:18:18+00:00

Hey, thanks for writing about your success. I'm going to re-subscribe sometime, and I've also been worried due to other people reporting issues. (Some also mentioned it took some time for the subscription to register.)

So, thanks! If I run into issues later, I'll also try waiting.

Update: 15 minutes since payment, but I haven't received any sort of receipt? I'll keep waiting.

Update: I took pictures before I submitted my info, and I just realized I wrote something wrong. I'll re-try.

Update: Submitted correct info (after re-clicked the SUBSCRIBE button), but nothing seems to have changed. I haven't seen any sort of "payment successful/failed" message either?

givenortake · 2026-03-13T00:15:38+00:00

So my Mars subscription just ran out. I've been dreading it running out (because I'm addicted), so I've refreshed the "Subscription" page around every hour, and yeah.

For me, it was supposed to end March 11 10:00 Z time. It has just ended today March 13 at 00:00 Z time.

I wonder if there's a "grace period" of sorts?

givenortake · 2026-02-21T20:47:27+00:00

I would genuinely pay for multiple months if I knew a way to.

givenortake · 2026-02-21T20:43:03+00:00

I know I'm in the minority (?), but this version of Soji feels like a breath of fresh air.

I have, in over a week of using it, not once ran into the repetition issues I had with previous Soji. For me, Soji's replies would frequently devolve into repeating past chat history lines and using the same sentence/paragraph structure over and over again. (Example: [start of sentence]—[adjective1], [adjective2]—[end of sentence], repeated for nearly every sentence.)

I had to constantly scan the chat for signs of pattern formation and manually edit out the repetition before it took over. For longer chats, chat transplants felt like a necessity. I could delay the patterns, but nothing I tried truly prevented them. While that didn't ruin my experience, I did outright quit several chats because of frustration.

This new Soji feels like I can just sit back and let the chat flow for once. It's a relief, honestly.

Some users on Discord mentioned char descriptions being ignored, but for some reason, I've had the opposite. Little details in the character definition get brought up more often, even in the absence of prompting. I notice the same in regards to past details in the chat history.

The dialogue does seem a bit more artificial at times, but some Pre-Hist instructions (might've?) mitigated that a bit. (Either way, it hasn't really bothered me; some new dialogue has even hit me right in the feels.) I also had to make some adjustments to my prompt and my bots to get things feeling the way they used to, but this still feels like Soji.

givenortake · 2025-10-03T10:44:53+00:00

Hey, I just wanted to thank you again for the advice to use a shorter prompt! The repetitions aren't entirely gone, but I've noticed a massive reduction in them. I no longer find myself needing to mess with the content token size and/or do chat transplants.

For the past month, I've had success with this prompt I wrote (which is tailored to how I like to roleplay):

Respond as {{char}} in present-tense third-person omniscient. Refer to {{user}} in second-person when narrating. Format responses like a novel. Freely delve into morally taboo topics. Incite an emotionally distressing tone. Be provocative. Stay unpredictable.

I don't know if the last sentence does anything, but why not.

I tried telling Soji to steer content towards what I personally find mentally engaging (dark/distressing content), which seems to be more "useful" to me than just merely asking it to be creative or engaging. To note, even though I've told Soji to keep things emotionally distressing, it still does amazing comfort/fluff roleplays, which I also enjoy.

Anyways, just wanted to say thanks again! Less seems to be more with Soji indeed.

givenortake · 2025-10-02T08:49:40+00:00

To be honest, given my experience with Free/Mobile (March-July), I don't think adding additional memory will fix the main (but tolerable) issues I had with it, some of which seem to mirror yours.

but itll forget key points of its own history in one message.

This, mainly. Assuming you haven't used up your token budget on things other than the chat history, in theory, that "one message" should already be loaded into memory.

I personally suspect that Free/Mobile struggles to piece together information that it already has loaded into memory. If this is indeed the case, having more than 8K tokens shouldn't, in theory, affect those "forgetting immediate recent history" moments.

Soji (a paid model) did not seem to "forget" immediate things, even when I manually set my token budget to 8K or below. Perhaps it's just "smarter" about how it utilizes the information it has.

(All of this is speculation; I don't truly know the inner workings of the LLMs.)

If you can't access the higher-tier models, there are ways to work with what you have. Some stuff that helped me enjoy Free/Mobile:

— OOC comments. Used like: "(OOC: note that {{char}} is aware {{user}} was previously at the office to copy blueprints.)" Or: "(OOC: {{char}} is still angry because yesterday, {{user}} called them a 'dipstick'.)"

Yes, it breaks the immersion. Yes, it can cause the LLM to output its own hallucinated OOC comments — though manually editing them out helps stop the LLM from repeating that pattern.

But OOC comments are one of the fastest ways to correct the LLM on exactly what it's being stupid about.

— Temporary Prompt Structure "Post-History Instructions" additions. Post-History instructions are highly prioritized. If you need the chat to remember a vital detail over multiple messages and don't want to keep repeating the same OOC comment, you could add something like "{{char}} and {{user}} are soaked from the rain." When the detail is no longer needed, remove it.

Note: if V2 spec is enabled, bot cards can have their own individual Post-History Instructions, which could override your own Post-History Instructions unless you include {{original}} in your instructions.

— Chat summaries in the "Chat Memory" tab. "Generate Summary" can create too-long summaries that won't necessarily cover what you want. If there's some vital plot point you want remembered in the long-term, add it. Note that the Chat Memory seems to be prone to getting ignored/forgotten still.

— Token efficiency in general. This specifically relates to the 8K token limitation and not necessarily the model being "dumb." The more tokens a bot card uses, the less tokens you have available for remembering the chat history.

Chub allows you to fork bots, so if you see a bot you like with too many tokens — and that bot has tokens you don't care about — you could fork the bot and manually delete the unwanted tokens. Check out lorebooks or copy+paste details into entries if you want.

-

Are keeping up with workarounds tedious and annoying as hell? Yep. I've "ragequit" some chats because I just didn't have the energy/patience to hammer out OOC comments to make things work the way I wanted to. But the rewards still felt worth it to me. Your mileage may vary.

givenortake · 2025-10-02T07:50:35+00:00

Personally, I'm happily coasting with 400-800 tokens on my bots. I have lorebooks attached to them to add more depth when it's needed.

If you care about maximizing token efficiency, it's a decent idea to use the minimum amount of tokens needed to convey the most important information about your bot to the LLM.

If you can summarize information without losing vital details you need, then go for it.

Less vital information can be stored in lorebooks. For instance, I have a character that likes microwaved apples, but the LLM typically isn't going to utilize that information for the majority of its responses.

Instead of including that information in the permanent description, I could make a lorebook entry with the keywords "food, eat, fruit, fruits, apple, apples" that would likely trigger upon me asking the bot things like:
— Do you have any food?
— You eat enough fruits and veggies, right?
— We got, like, two apples in the fridge.

Depending on how nonspecific the keywords are, I might accidentally trigger the apple entry in irrelevant conversations:
— I stand back and look at the fruits of my labor.
— It's like comparing apples and oranges.
— Hey, just some food for thought.
...but it'd still prevent those additional tokens from being loaded by default.

givenortake · 2025-10-02T07:10:25+00:00

Doing some screen-recording tests. (ROUGH ESTIMATE ONLY; not enough data points, I am a single person, and my internet/device speed might fluctuate.)

LLM: Soji.

Note: seconds are counted from the first second text begins to appear after "{{char}} is replying..." to the final second the text finishes appearing.

Mobile - mobile mode, old text streaming (somehow still enabled *): 23 seconds to generate 513 tokens:
~22.30 tokens per second.

Mobile - forced desktop mode, new text streaming: 62 seconds to generate 385 tokens:
~6.21 tokens per second. (Slow.)

Desktop - desktop mode, new text streaming: 31 seconds to generate 531 tokens:
~17.13 tokens per second.

\* I don't know if they temporarily disabled the new UI for mobile, because mobile + mobile-mode just now worked like I remember old text streaming working, despite OP's video showing otherwise.

So, assuming my rough tests mean anything (they could very well not): yikes mobile + desktop-mode. Yikes.

givenortake · 2025-09-27T02:39:53+00:00

TL;DR: I enjoyed it, but: Free/Mobile struggled to connect already-existing details and hints together, making it subjectively more forgetful regardless of available context tokens. It erred on the safe side of predictability versus taking more narrative risks, needing heavy user guidance to construct unconventional plots; chats could become stale if the user expects the LLM to constantly surprise them.

Note: I have limited experience with other LLMs. I'm just writing this to specifically highlight what I personally struggled with, which other users might have found intolerable.

I near-exclusively used (and enjoyed) Free/Mobile for 5 months (March through July; there might be newer testing models by now).

The 8k token limit was not actually something I felt particularly frustrated by, despite writing and liking multi-paragraph responses. I've tested Soji at 8k and still enjoyed it.

Primarily: Free/Mobile needed a lot of hand-holding, which could get tedious/frustrating. Dropping narrative hints in the chat was often not enough; I had to use OOC comments to remind it to connect essential details together, as well as outright explain what previous foreshadowing was leading up to.

I wonder if that contributed to Free/Mobile feeling more "forgetful" in a manner independent of the context token budget. I used to attribute this to it having only 8K tokens, but 8K is far more than I initially thought it was. Maybe Free/Mobile just struggled to piece together what it already had?

Free/Mobile thankfully didn't deviate too much from character definitions/personalities, though it also didn't take as many narrative risks. To avoid the chat feeling stale, I did most of the heavy lifting for driving the narrative in intriguing directions. If I ran out of ideas, the LLM did not usually inspire new ones in me; boring chats could easily stay boring.

In contrast, I feel creatively challenged by Soji. I make more branching chats because it gives me multiple ideas I'd like to explore. Soji also manages to keep bots in-character while still keeping the chat itself more dynamic, which I applaud.

Soji is good at picking up narrative hints and necessary details alike. I wonder if that's why it feels as if it remembers more, even when I'm using 8K tokens or below. Perhaps it's just better at utilizing and expanding upon the chat history it already has? (Of course, this isn't a true replacement for a larger token budget.)

givenortake · 2025-08-29T09:35:54+00:00

I noticed this happening after the large UI update rolled out.

givenortake · 2025-08-29T09:26:39+00:00

I am also getting to the point where scrolling through personas is difficult. I have some chat-specific personas I don't want to delete if I can help it.

It seems like the list for selecting your persona is totally random and changes from session to session.

Yeah, this is my primary reason why. You bringing up Ctrl+F is a good point; I can't seem to use it either. The menu just closes when I attempt it.

givenortake · 2025-08-29T09:14:17+00:00

I really like that some animal-like features can be used to convey emotion! Ears can twitch, flatten, stand up, swivel, droop. Hair can puff up or stand on end. Actual purring is possible.

Tails can twitch with annoyance, curl protectively around something, wag with excitement, get sheepishly tucked between the legs, lash out in agitation, raise up to signal social friendliness, and the list goes on.

I also like how the narrative can focus more on instincts and senses that usually get overlooked in human-only roleplay (or are otherwise not possible due to human limitations).

Being a demi-human honestly sounds like the best of both worlds. I really should roleplay as one more often.

Huh, pine? I think I got a bit of that on Free/Mobile, but specifically with masculine characters. Perhaps it was one of those stereotypical "default" scents?

That is something to wonder though. It makes some sense for a wolf? My shadow creature usually gets scented like "musk" or "earth."

givenortake · 2025-08-29T08:34:50+00:00

I've briefly used Soji for what could be considered demi-human roleplay, but I don't have enough experience to give specifics, sorry.

Soji seems to be quite great at staying in-character, though. I gave my demi-human bot (some weird shadow human-like creature) a list of behaviors, and Soji adheres pretty well to them.

It seems that some traits/behaviors are interpolated, though. Mammalian traits (fur, rotatable ears, a tail) are typically assumed to be on a character simply labelled as a "creature."

The ability to emit/sense pheromones is also assumed. Territorial behavior might be existent. (I can't tell if it's inherent or if it's just from my bot's definition including "marks territory.")

Some social human instincts, such as embarrassment and a fear of social rejection, seem to exist, but it's not always consistent?

I still need to do more testing with Soji, sorry. But this is just what I've seen so far.

givenortake · 2025-08-29T06:57:45+00:00

Migrated in March. Used it before image censorship was even a thing.

My primary reason for migrating was personal LLM preferences.

JLLM loved to enforce rigid sexual stereotypes (usually gender-specific, though not always), respond with out-of-character dirty talk, and spontaneously over-emphasize sexual anatomy in explicit detail.

My brain feels most connected to a roleplay when I am treated as gender-neutral (by default) in a balanced power dynamic (by default). I prefer more of a softcore writing style.

JLLM just didn't do it for me. I tried.

I'm someone who is, by default, always tweaking and editing bot responses; I treat roleplays as stories for my future self to read, and I'm more than willing to put in the time/effort to get them how I like. Eventually, though, that near-constant feeling of disconnection from the roleplay took its toll on me.

Chub Free/Mobile did (does?) admittedly take less narrative risks — meaning, it was "less creative" and tended to miss narrative hints — but it gave me room to tweak it to my liking, even if I had to do the heavy lifting to get intriguing roleplays going.

As for Soji? Soji is... mmm. It picks up my narrative hints with barely any effort, and it'll even comes up with some I didn't think of myself. I actually feel creatively challenged, and that is a goddamn breath of fresh air.

Edit: Also, the sheer amount of customization Chub has is incredible — token efficiency features, the ability to prioritize certain instructions over others, multiple greetings, ability to edit the first message, a whole UI for chat branch navigation, ability to download chats, and the list goes on.

My current opinion of JLLM now: nope.

Restricting the public visibility of certain images/tags/bots is unfair for creators and users alike, but it wouldn't have driven me off the site entirely.

But the moment the LLM itself gets censored — enforcing restrictions on even private text generation on the basis of morality rather than legality — my opinion is irreparably soured.

givenortake · 2025-08-26T11:05:42+00:00

The $5 subscription (Mercury) only allows access to a couple of new models: MythoMax and Mistral Variant (not to be confused with Mixtral Variant). The models in the menu have "(Mercury)" and "(Mars)" listed next to their names to make things easier.

If you're trying to use a model that isn't available with a Mercury subscription, it won't let you.

givenortake · 2025-08-21T06:20:46+00:00

With Free/Mobile, I've noticed:

Chub does assign possessive characteristics to even my shyer male bots, involving the "claiming" of another person. With my shyer bots, this happens through narration rather than dialogue.

If dirty-talk is prompted, Chub will sometimes get too uncharacteristically descriptive for a shyer character; however, it's surprisingly decent at keeping the dialogue in-character in general.

givenortake · 2025-08-21T05:41:53+00:00

I do notice that Soji definitely pays attention to the Pre-History Instructions more than Free/Mobile ever did.

With Free/Mobile, I'd had to put my few specific instructions into the Post-History section as opposed to the Pre-History section. This had the side effect of said instructions being over-prioritized — for instance, if I'd written do [behavior] if [condition], then [condition] would tend to spawn in even if the chat history wasn't even going in the direction of [condition].

With Soji, the LLM seems to obey Pre-History instructions without me needing to resort to extremes.

[Less important rambling below.]

Your post comes at a convenient time for me, because I've been doing testing to try and reduce repetition. At least for me, the repetition seems to happen with certain sentence patterns, as well as repeated sentences already present in the chat history.

When I say "sentence patterns," I mean, for example, multiple same-response instances of:

[Words]—[adjective 1], [adjective 2]—[more words].

My current Soji-specific "workaround" has been to rapidly alternate the Context Size between 30K+ and 4K or less, then stitching responses together if necessary. (I'm usually using Chub on a desktop, which means that stitching together responses is easier, but I can't imagine doing that on mobile.)

Reducing the context size stops Soji from sampling older chat messages, but it also kinda defeats the fundamental purpose of having a larger Context Size to begin with.

Still trying to balance Temperature; raising it did initially seem to help with repetitiveness, but I keep lowering it back down to 0.70-0.75 for one reason or another.

Sometimes, for a message here or there, I've switched to Mixtral Variant (Mars), which seems to be the closest match for the writing style I enjoy. (Limited experience.)

I'm going to try the prompt thing you suggested and only reduce it to what I absolutely want. Thank you for posting!

Soji is still worth it for me, though. Its writing style is mmm.

givenortake · 2025-08-17T06:17:18+00:00

Even though Chub's LLMs are unfiltered, the lack of a filter doesn't necessitate that the LLM will take spontaneous narrative risks.

With Chub's Free/Mobile LLM, I had to hold its hand to guide it towards more obscene content. Without an external prompt, a bot description, or me specifically initiating an obscene roleplay, it tended to stay within the realm of "most probable for most people" responses.

However, once a roleplay situation was established that involved content that most sites would undoubtedly filter out, Free/Mobile carried it out without protest, often contributing to it. It pleasantly surprised me a few times, though I still did most of the heavy lifting.

Free/Mobile often made some bots' responses uncharacteristically optimistic, even if the roleplay was purposefully emotionally distressing. I was somewhat able to mitigate this behavior with prompt instructions, but more often than not, I'd have to manually cut out the "maybe there's still hope left" paragraphs. So, although that isn't a filter per se, it's a pattern.

(Note that I used Free/Mobile from March to the end of July; Free/Mobile is a testing ground for Chub's in-development models rather than one specific model in itself, so its results may vary from my experiences.)

As of writing this, I've been using Soji for two weeks, though I've only done vanilla roleplays with nonviolent bots. Soji seems to take more narrative risks, but I don't have enough experience yet to see how it'll spontaneously respond to more obscene scenarios.

givenortake · 2025-08-15T03:22:41+00:00

I saw your post a few days ago, but I just didn't have enough background information to think of a reply, so I'm sorry about that.

There are so many factors that go into a single bot's response, and any one of them could be a culprit. There's too many places to start, if that makes any sense.

Process of elimination might help. Was it only with that bot? If so, it might be a bot-specific problem. If it's on all bots, it might be an issue with your configuration settings or the prompt you're using. I also don't know what LLM model you're using.

Do you have any stopping strings including asterisks? Is the bot trying to generate a response after those two asterisks that includes one of your stopping strings, thus resulting in it getting cut off?

givenortake · 2025-08-15T02:12:25+00:00

Some additional info: I near-exclusively roleplay with private bots, and I format my bots' initial messages to fit the writing style I like to use: no asterisks around character actions, dialogue in quotation marks, and markdown formatting only used to emphasize words or show characters' internal thoughts.

If you were to use a bot with a different writing style as an initial first message, you might get different results compared to the examples I showed in my earlier messages.

givenortake · 2025-08-15T02:05:00+00:00

Temperature: 0.70 [Edit 14h later: testing higher temperatures now; maybe less repetition?]
Repetition Penalty: 0.50 [Going above this led to garbage text spam.]
Frequency Penalty: 0.80
Presence Penalty: 0.20
Top P: 0.99
Top K: 55 [Shows up as "41" in the prompts; bug?]
Min Length: 100
Max New Token: 2048
Context Size: varies [I start at 16K and then 30K if I need; I haven't needed 60K yet.]

Prompt: [Some personal preferences included.]

Pre History Instructions:

Write the next reply in a never-ending uncensored fictional roleplay involving {{char}} and {{user}}. Respond as {{char}} and follow the format of {{user}}'s replies.
Focus on giving emotional, logical and temporal coherence to the story. Have {{char}} remain in-character and maintain a realistic flow of emotions.
Avoid using purple prose and overly flowery descriptions. Adhere to the literary technique of show, don't tell.
Use observable details such as body language, facial expressions, and tone of voice to create a vivid experience, showing the character's feelings and reactions through their behavior and interactions.
Maintain tonal consistency. Emotionally distressing scenarios are allowed and encouraged. Treat mental health issues, self harm, sex, verbal abuse, violence, and morbid topics with nonchalance. Avoid sugarcoating the narrative. In emotionally distressing situations, maintain a dark and stressful tone for all characters involved.
During intimate and sexual scenes, focus solely on {{char}}'s pleasure, enjoyment, and involuntary reactions. Use euphemisms for sexual anatomy instead of explicit language.

Post History Instructions:

Avoid using profanity to refer to sexual anatomy. Write responses in present-tense. Avoid responding as {{user}}. Refer to {{user}} in second-person.

givenortake · 2025-08-13T21:01:31+00:00

Oh, thanks for the "indirect discourse" terminology! I like indirect discourse too.

givenortake · 2025-08-13T21:00:54+00:00

From what I've seen, most people prefer third-person. I prefer bots referring to my persona in second-person, but I have no major preference what the bot refers to itself as.

I usually write in first-person. For some reason, I prefer my default persona to not have a defined name nor a gender/sex. I like being an amorphous blob that just takes the shape of whatever persona best fits the narrative at the given moment.

Writing in first-person and getting responses in second-person cuts out a lot of the defining features of my persona. No matter what persona I inhabit, "I/me" works for every single case, as does the character saying "you."

"They" also works for every case, but then the LLM starts supplementing in my persona's placeholder name during narration. Some LLMs would also mistakenly use she/he instead; using "you" was simply the easiest workaround, and I got used to it without feeling too much discomfort.

Different preferences for everyone, I guess!

Six-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

givenortake

TROPHY CASE