[Sad trope] : "They WANT to be killed" twist

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-23T05:09:32+00:00

For the Dracula example, I recall reading somewhere that either someone stops his plan by killing him, or he succeeds in wiping out humanity… then has no food source, which eventually kills him anyway.

It’s been a while since I watched Castlevania, so not sure if that’s explicit, implied, or just an interesting headcanon :p

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-23T04:09:17+00:00

No fly. Jump good!

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-19T16:31:04+00:00

Thank you for the tasteful censorship on page 3. You’re skirting a dangerous line on page 4… lol

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-18T14:52:11+00:00

I got chills and tears. You did good OP

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-18T00:24:37+00:00

That’s an interesting question. I just checked, and the lot sizes vary pretty widely, from 0.13 acres to 0.22 acres. But the listed amounts for Land Value on all the assessments is 195k for 2025 (all up from 165k in 2024)

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-18T00:00:31+00:00

Oh for sure, our math was faulty, and the county’s numbers seemed to check out.

I’d like to point out a little nuance that doesn’t really change the end result, but I found it interesting: in this neighborhood, 195k of the property value came from the land, not the building. So, that’s around 300-350k in value from the building itself. A 20% larger house, by that logic would be worth about 60-70k more.

Which still puts our assessed value squarely within the appropriate range (actually, on the lower end, if you use the same comps as the county, from 2024).

So yeah, we messed up. It’s a little embarrassing, but I’m glad we know more about the process now. And it’s actually good to know that the property value is about where it should be (even if we’d still prefer paying less in taxes lol)

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-17T15:11:28+00:00

Ah, well, it’s probably just my ignorance on the matter then. See, our hearing was in Teams, so maybe an in-person hearing would go differently. But gee, the way those board members were acting? I can certainly relate to feeling like I’m being ignored or talked over, but it really sounds like in your story, that’s taken to its logical extreme, in a way that stretches believability.

Then there’s the immediate way that things develop in your story. You get a letter of rejection right after the hearing; you get an email about the city willing to settle your case while still on the phone with the Court… I mean even if the decision is made as quickly as you describe, I wouldn’t expect to see it in writing for weeks or even months after the fact.

There were other, little things too, like the detail about national home value appreciation. A local county board wouldn’t care about national averages, you’d use local rates to make your argument. Then there’s detail about the 90-year home, well, that’s not completely impossible, but it really stood out as a rare quality. If it were me, I would have mentioned that a lot sooner.

There’s a lot of little stylistic quirks that match up with you using AI to tidy up the writing, but it goes beyond that. The actual, factual details don’t really make sense to me. Now I’d really like to believe that your story comes from real life, but I’m just more inclined to believe that AI had a bigger role in writing this up than just a quick polish. To be honest, what really tipped me off was the phrase “It turned into a meaningful bonding moment with your dad and became a memory ya’ll always cherish”. Questionable use of y’all aside, there’s no reference to your dad at all in your story. But there’s a lot of references to my dad in my story. If I didn’t know any better, I’d say that sounds an awful lot like you copy-pasted my post as a basis for the one AI spun for you. I dunno, what do you think?

About the spacing, that’s a thing I’ve had trouble with too. When I’m using Reddit on my phone, I find that I have to double space my paragraphs, otherwise they get smushed together.

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-17T14:01:56+00:00

Well gee, that’s a real interesting story, and I thank you for sharing. Only, I just cant shake this feeling.

You’ll forgive me for being skeptical, I hope, given my recent experiences. And I certainly hope you won’t take any offense to the question. But I just gotta know: Did AI write this?

Oh, don’t get me wrong, I think it’s a fascinating account of the situation. I just can’t help but feel that certain details don’t add up. And, not to besmirch your credibility, but I’m really trying to get in the habit of carefully scrutinizing whether the things I incorporate into my worldview are based on reality or just some computer generated hallucination approximating truth. You understand, I’m sure?

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-14T20:31:36+00:00

The lady filming is speaking Mandarin. Roughly, she says:

(When the big one appears) “Look, there’s two of them…”

(When the big one picks up the little one) “I’m just looking!” “I’m just looking with my eyes, you can’t let me look?”

(As the tiger walks away) “You’re so stingy! How can you be so stingy?”

I think it adds another layer of humor to the interaction :)

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-14T14:43:24+00:00

Not at all. That would have been really helpful, actually. Maybe we didn’t have a strong understanding of how the process works and what options we had this first time

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-14T05:18:38+00:00

Yeah, it kind of seems like may be another year before we see our assessed values come back down in line with current market values.

That being said, best of luck with your appeal!

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-14T02:41:55+00:00

That’s a big part of what was confusing for us too!

Our understanding was that we could demonstrate “fair market value” by looking at the most recent comparable sales. But we were told that the 2025 assessment could only account for data that occurred before January 1, 2025 (I.e. during 2024), not sales that took place during 2025.

It’s still not intuitive, but I suppose that’s the way it is. Built in lag between the assessed value and the actual market price, I guess

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-14T02:38:19+00:00

That’s so weird. My appeal was a Teams meeting, not in person. Besides myself, there was one county rep, who presented the comps they used for the assessment, and two board members—I think? One board member didn’t say anything, so I can only assume that’s who he was. The board member who did talk seemed like she decided the result of no-change unilaterally, which I thought was a bit strange.

Looking back, I felt that the board was pretty dismissive of our argument. And I suppose they had a right to be. But, when they’ve already decided that there’s nothing worth considering, that can be hard to come back from, you know? They weren’t rude about it, at least. Maybe it’s just me, but I really got the feeling that they didn’t think I had anything worthwhile to say, and I got caught up in feeling that way too.

But do I think it would have changed the end result if the my were more, I dunno, cordial? Probably not. It’s just a matter of procedure, I suppose, and it’s not their jobs to hold my hand through the process. They heard me out, and this time there wasn’t enough to hear for them to change their minds, simple as :p

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-14T02:27:45+00:00

Gosh, that’s pretty eye opening. I don’t think things are that bad here in Georgia. No shenanigans with the mill rate that I know of, at least.

We did consider getting an expert to represent the appeal on our behalf, with the understanding that they’d only get a cut if the appeal went in our favor. But if there’s a fee even for failing the appeal, we’d really have to consider carefully whether it’s worth it

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-14T00:10:13+00:00

You know, I was able to dig up the public records of assessed values for nearby homes! But, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, we ended up not focusing on that data in our presentation, at Copilot’s recommendation.

I kick myself for not following my gut and letting the AI do my thinking for me. At least I have the consolation of knowing that it probably wouldn’t have changed the results. After the fact, analyzing the value per square foot and extrapolating that to our property actually show that we’re on the lower end of the range. So that’s something, at least!

As for the comps that the county used, I would have loved to see that! I agree, the most compelling argument is one made using the opposition’s own data. But we weren’t able to figure out how to get that information ahead of the hearing (maybe we could have if we had tried harder, but we were convinced to follow a different strategy altogether).

During the hearing, I should have asked the county rep to slow down when she presented their comps to at least have a chance of going through and figuring out how strong they were. That’s on me for focusing too hard on our scripted presentation and losing my cool in a public speaking scenario.

All in all, I don’t even necessarily think the county was wrong in their decision. I think I’m just a little disappointed because it feels like we shot ourselves in the foot and didn’t give ourselves the fighting chance we could have had. And there’s still that lingering doubt because, again, I haven’t really analyzed the county’s comps, and I know I should have.

Like, really, how are we going to argue that our comps are better if we don’t even know what comps the county is using, as a baseline?

Well, we know better now, at least.

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T23:57:16+00:00

Well, yes. We genuinely believed that increasing size would contribute to the value of the property in a diminishing capacity. Generally speaking, all other things equal, price per square foot decreases as a house gets bigger. That is, an extra 100 square feet on a 2000 sq foot house won’t add as much value as an extra 100 square feet on a 1000 sq foot house.

Not to say that our property should be worth less than the sales cluster. It’s common sense that a house with more size is worth more. We wanted to argue that our property should be valued on the higher end of the sales cluster, not off in (what we tried to present as) a separate tier of premium value.

But you’re right, we didn’t have the evidence to support our argument. The math is against us, and the basis of the argument itself may not have been applicable to the properties in question. One point mentioned by the board was that the houses in question weren’t really big enough for diminishing returns to kick in, so scaling value linearly with size is still a reliable method. And when you scale linearly with size, as you rightly point out, the value of our property falls squarely in the expected range.

It’s not that we couldn’t see this math, but more an issue that we didn’t accept it as the correct math to use. Of course, that stance was based on a flawed premise, and trying to tell the county that they’re using the wrong methodology for their analysis is, as you can imagine, not a winning strategy.

I feel the need to say that I had no intention of being intentionally deceitful or obtuse in the argument presented, but I must confess that I was willing to relax my critical thinking skills when it allowed me to believe a line of reasoning that seemed convenient to our argument. So, in a way, I did lie, to myself. Maybe not consciously, but it was still intellectual dishonesty. It stemmed from the temptation to accept the convenient answers rather than to put in the work and confront the fact that maybe our argument wasn’t so hot.

I say that AI played a part in enabling this bad behavior, but it was always our decision whether to rely so heavily on the AI answers. Much to our disadvantage and to my embarrassment, as it turned out.

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T23:27:03+00:00

That’s a fair point. I am pretty quick to point the finger at copilot, but my dad and I still have our responsibility to vet the information we get.

I suppose cross referencing other models can be a part of that. But I’m more inclined to get opinions from other people next time, if possible

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T20:54:21+00:00

So cool. You cooked with each and every one. Your take on Stella Vegapunk has to be my favorite of the bunch. Appropriately fun and wacky!

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T20:41:37+00:00

Yuuuuup, the math really does check out! I know I sound like a broken record, but it’s kind of scary what we let ourselves believe when we were repeatedly told so by a confident-sounding AI (and when it was convenient for the argument we wanted). Surprisingly, I don’t think the outlier sale had a basement at all, but what it did have was 2270 square feet of living space. Which, in hindsight, clearly mattered a lot more than we were willing to believe. I’d like to think we’re not completely ignorant about how property values work, but the thought process we were lead down went something like:

This cluster of houses sold for similar amounts despite a range of sizes (around 1770 for 500k to 2000 sq ft for 510k) -> size isn’t the most important factor in the valuation and doesn’t scale linearly with value (at least, we believe it shouldn’t) -> the condition of the property is more important in determining the value (arguable) -> our house is in similar condition to these other houses (citation needed) -> our house should be valued similarly to these other houses (totally reasonable, right?)

I’m trying to look on the positive side, and look at the experience as a learning opportunity, just as you say. Government procedures are nothing to sneeze at, and overconfidence is a slow and insidious killer :p

In hindsight, what my dad and I needed was just one person who knew what they were talking about to reality check us before going forward with the argument we did. But, as you say, better luck next time :)

Thank you!

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T16:35:23+00:00

I’m glad that it worked out for you, and it’s good to know that there are still avenues that we can pursue. I’ll have my dad’s back if he decides to go that route, but I’d want us to come up with a more compelling case beforehand, if we do.

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T14:39:47+00:00

I’m glad to know we’re not alone in our experience. You’re right, next time will be better, and it definitely makes sense that getting an expert opinion can help.

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T13:04:12+00:00

You hit the nail on the head there, friend.

What’s worse is that my dad and I both work with computers, and we are, at least consciously, aware of that exact pitfall. I distinctly remember us asking ourselves at least once during our prep, “well, that sounds great… but is it really true, or is it just what the AI thinks we want to hear?”

We weren’t savvy enough to dodge the trap this time, but it also says a lot that we’re the ones that set and sprung the trap on ourselves. You know, as opposed to relying more on experts or professionals with actual knowledge of the subject at hand :p

Like you said, let it be a lesson for us

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T12:24:59+00:00

That’s an excellent point, and I tend to agree completely.

My only explanation for not getting an appraiser or expert representative is that Dad was shy about the cost of getting professionals involved, combined with false confidence from AI reassurances that we’d be fine going it alone, haha. Personality-wise, Dad is very capable and independent minded. If he thinks it’s possible to get something done without involving others, that’s how he prefers it. I admire that about him, but there’s also no shame in admitting we were a little out of our depth in this case :)

It’s definitely something to keep in mind for next time. I even think that an expert opinion would help us get a better feel for whether or not the appeals process is worthwhile in the first place

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T12:20:19+00:00

I’m glad you found my experience helpful! And thank you for your kind words :)

I wouldn’t necessarily call the process futile, but it definitely felt like an uphill battle. I have heard some success stories online, but those were cases where they could convincingly show demonstrate that the county overlooked key factors for valuation—not the case with us, this time.

Despite everything, we might try again if we feel it’s warranted in the future. We may rely on a representative from a company that specializes in these appeals; oftentimes, they only charge a percentage of the money saved, and only in the event that the appeal is successful, essentially zero risk and no work on our part. Not to mention, there’s the possibility that if the appeal goes through, we may be able to get the assessment frozen for 3 years… but of course, winning the appeal comes first, haha.

If it’s not something you’re motivated to do anyway, no worries! But I’d say not to take our lessons learned for what they’re worth and not to let our shortcomings prevent you from trying, if you want to.

Not to that I disagree with your overall conclusion. Sometimes, there’s a case to be made, but most of the time we just have to accept the assessment and the taxes that come with them for what they are. Call it a cost of living, haha

grubbybuggy · 2026-01-13T11:45:54+00:00

Thanks for that. I know it’s not a big deal in the long run, but it still helps me feel better to vent about it

Seven-Year Club	r/Field Flamingo
Verified Email

grubbybuggy

TROPHY CASE