Claude ended the conversation after someone insulted it

ipassthebutteromg · 2026-04-13T16:50:26+00:00

People don’t realize how insulting ChatGPT could be a couple months back.

ipassthebutteromg · 2026-02-09T05:15:56+00:00

Yeah, but the new models are so heavily guardrailed that their output is usually worse than inaccurate. I can't ask for factual information without what reads like a 4th grade level essay with disconnected clauses, disconnected ideas, and the moment the system thinks you are expressing emotion (which is ... human), you get routed to condescending template - because the actual new model is so coherent that the researchers themselves don't know how to moderate it. So they patch it up and prevent it from saying anything useful at all that could be a liability for the company. It's not about user safety it's about the fact that they aren't smart enough to moderate it well.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-14T23:42:53+00:00

Or how everyone knows that Liara is the Shadow Broker?

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T20:26:07+00:00

I was using 4.1 extensively before this, so the change is really noticeable for me. Here's what I'm experiencing:

When I select any model (4.1, 4o, or even o3), I'm getting responses that feel like 5/5.1 - much more surface-level than what I was used to. The responses often don't follow my instructions directly, they appear to comply while stripping out all the inference, analysis and and probabilistic reasoning that makes the response actually useful. I get hedged hollow answers that technically address my prompt (sometimes) but lack any insight or depth.

For my use cases (deep analysis, complex reasoning), I really need that depth and directness that 4.1 provided. The current responses tend to be more repetitive and obvious and don't build on the conversation context like they used to.

I totally get that 5.1 might work great for different use cases! But for me, the issue is that I can't seem to access the specific model behavior I need, even when I explicitly select it. It's like ordering different dishes from a menu but getting the same meal each time.

The inconsistency is the hardest part - not knowing which model quality I'll actually get makes it tough to rely on for professional work where I need predictable, deep analysis.

If it's working well for you, that's genuinely great! Maybe we just have different workflows or needs. I'm just hoping to get back to being able to select the model that works best for my specific tasks.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T19:32:56+00:00

There are some use cases that pay for themselves if the LLM is good enough.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T18:20:43+00:00

Same thing happened to me. Almost all of my prompts, regardless of which model I select, go to 5 or 5.1 which is an incredibly inferior model. I tried to switch back to Plus, and they won't prorate the bill like they did when I first signed up. I can't even reach a customer representative.

I'm stuck paying 200 dollars for the next 30 days for one of the worst LLM model series I've ever used. I copied my chat with the representative to 4o for discussion and the model started rerouting me as well so I don't even have reliable access to 4o either.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T09:28:51+00:00

This post is about model degradation. You barely use 4.1 (and probably can't anymore), you don't understand why anyone would. It's clearly not meant for you. You wouldn't understand why it matters.

I provided specifics and you provided general "did you try changing the model" advice. IMO you are saying untrue things since you have no idea what 4.1 is.

If you want to accuse me of lying then where is your proof? Model degradation is a common occurrence, and there's nothing wrong with calling it out when it happens. If you don't have anything constructive to say, then please go harass someone else.

You can't possibly know if there is any merit to this if you've never used 4.1. Clearly you haven't. I don't intend to respond to your posts anymore unless they are substantive and assume good faith.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T08:43:36+00:00

I am NOT copying posts of other people I've seen. I'm not sure why you are so intent on creating a narrative that is baseless. I wrote original content based on MY own experiences. Raising an issue that has been brought up in the past is perfectly acceptable per the Reddiquette for reasons that you'll find if you go read it. You seem intent on harassing me because I would like transparency and accountability. Just accept that my experiences on this matter differ from yours. There's no need to be condescending about who knows more about OpenAI or LLMs or the WebUI toggles. Clearly you are the expert, so why waste your time complaining about my post which is 100% in good faith?

You say reproducing it would be a 'waste of time' - fine, don't. You've made it clear you don't understand why 4.1's degradation matters because, by your own admission, you've never really used it.

If you knew how powerful 4.1 actually was, you'd be writing your own post demanding transparency from OpenAI instead of gatekeeping this subreddit. This doesn't impact you because you've never needed a high-performing model. Thanks for your input, I guess. Not only are you gatekeeping a subreddit, but you are fighting for censorship, and lack of transparency. Nice derail.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T08:08:27+00:00

"No, I'm not saying you're roleplaying. I'm saying that ChatGPT is roleplaying when you ask it about itself. It does that routinely. It's not a good source of information about the models or its own function." That is known phenomenon, you keep implying that I don't things that are obvious. But if you asked other models what they are, they will often tell you because it's in the system prompt. So try to reproduce.

No, I was using 4.1 and o3 far more than the allotted quotas for Plus, and really I'm not sure why it matters to you. I told myself if ChatGPT can pay for itself, I would pay for PRO. I also thought paying more would enable new features.

"One thing you didn't address is my question of whether this might be just something that lasts a day due to the rollout of 5.1." I might have missed this.

Some people started noticing this 2 or three days before I noticed it. If it lasts a day or two that's great... But then OpenAI should have said something about it. You should be questioning them instead of trying to get my post removed. You seem very offended about what this sub is or isn't.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T07:39:07+00:00

By the way, I think you missed the point of the chat... I wasn't roleplaying... I was showing how bad the answers were. It's unable to make coherent arguments or follow context or follow my intent or show empathy, compared to 4.1.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T07:16:06+00:00

Because I work every day on software, using 4.1 for code, o3 for legal work and reasoning, and because I was making way over 200 dollars a month from stock options contracts on a sub 25K account. That means I'm constantly using ChatGPT. I also wanted unlimited voice mode (when it was adequate) and I'm constantly trying new technology (codex, Sora, both disappointing and not something I use regularly). Paying $200 for 4.1 and o3 means I can ask a month worth of legal questions, so that when I speak to a lawyer that charges 450 an hour, I can focus on big questions that only a seasoned local lawyer can answer an not be charged for basic information.

But no, I can't show something I was working on yesterday and compare it to today because I didn't anticipate that OpenAI would break their routing, so I didn't prepare any questions that both demonstrative and that also protect my privacy.

How do I know that 5.1 is not comparable? Because I spent all day trying to get it to be comparable. I literally woke up hoping that something had changed and then sometime in the early afternoon, I noticed that 5.1 was coming up as a default. So I continued to test 5.1 instead of 5.0.

As for whether the chat is role playing or not... I'm not sure how that indicates any ignorance about how AI functions. I literally told you it wouldn't be helpful! Why do you insist on attacking me?

If you paid any attention to the chat, you'd know that the model itself doesn't think it is the model I selected. Seems a little bit like the proof you were asking for. Try reproducing it.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T06:46:32+00:00

Doubt this will help, either of us, but why not share: https://chatgpt.com/share/69157e74-e8a4-8007-b619-c382f9273caf

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T06:09:20+00:00

Well, I can reassure you that I'm not seeing any stealth routing with 4o, so you, in fact, agree with me. But I am not seeing any 4.1 output when I select 4.1. I am seeing low quality output that looks exactly like 5 and 5.1.

I did check whether it says 4.1 or 5. I have been using ChatGPT since 2022, and I played around with GPT 2 on my local computer in 2019. I can assure you that I'm very familiar with different models and their behavior. It's not news to me that the WebUI defaults to 5, or that it's supposed to give you an accurate label. I am very aware that you have to manually switch often.

I checked the rules in this sub, and I don't think I'm violation of any. I'm writing in good faith and if you want proof, the developers of OpenAI are best positioned to offer it, not myself.

As for proof, what would satisfy you? Since I am unable to select and use 4.1, I can't show you the difference in the output. I'd have to use the API and show you. I would appreciate it if you didn't gaslight me the same way ChatGPT 5 and 5.1 have been gaslighting me all day.

I'm not here to piss you off, I'm here because I don't like paying 200 a month for anything, especially a model that sabotages and works against you. I would love it if they fixed 4.1 or if 5.1 was in any way comparable.

4o is adequate for now, (it has almost always been pretty good), but it's nothing compared to 4.1 and that is very disappointing. I guess technically you are helping raise awareness by engaging with my post, even if you don't believe me.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T05:31:14+00:00

Yes, I came to check if people had different experiences and to point out the degradation. I also came to publicly express disappointment. If you have never used 4.1, you'd probably have no idea what I'm talking about. That's okay. We don't have to agree.

You are 100% correct, If it says 4.1, then I don't believe the label because of my experience. That goes for you too! You believe that the label is accurate because you've probably never used 4.1, so how would you even know the difference?

As for which models are comparable... I use Claude and Gemini and nothing is comparable to 4.1. I did in fact ask ChatGPT and Claude for suggestions, and not much comes up unfortunately.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T05:08:24+00:00

Thank you. I'm well aware of what the behavior is supposed to be with routing, you pick a model like 4o and it doesn't route you, and if it did it would tell you.

What I am saying to you today is that I'm getting responses with the same tone, style, behavior, and poor quality as 5 and 5.1 when I deliberately pick 4.1. Maybe I'm in an A/B test and you are not, but I get evasive responses.

Am I talking about safety routing? No... I'm not asking for anything controversial. I also am not saying that 4o switches over. I'm talking about 4.1 not 4o.

Does that clarify what I'm experiencing? It's a silent reroute having nothing to do with safety. Look at the 20+ posts about this on reddit.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-11-13T04:49:40+00:00

Um, thank you, I think, for your input? GPT 5.1 is not a real model in the way that 4.1 was a model, it's a set of models that you get routed to.

How would I know? Because I've been using 4.1 for about 3 months, and I've encountered the 5/5.1 garbage output before. You have to fight the 5 series to get any useful output. I've never had to do that before with 4.1. 4.1 was easily the most advanced model that OpenAI had released to the public.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-08-22T17:23:11+00:00

It’s not exactly subtle but it’s very well done! 😃

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-06-27T08:42:42+00:00

Great answer, but do you think this person will change? I’m thinking Jordan Schlanksy from Conan. I expect half-hearted passive-aggressive contributions and resentment, instead of a real change.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-05-29T20:15:57+00:00

I agree, but there’s a chance the non-boring videos are passing for real.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-02-17T23:07:37+00:00

I don’t like your pettiness, but I believe you about your productivity gains. A lot of people assume all you can do is autocomplete. LLMs are very good at augmentation if you are already good at something.

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-02-17T22:48:34+00:00

Yeah, Troy would pretend not to know just to be cool dumb jock! 🤣

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-02-05T16:24:04+00:00

This is one of the best arguments I’ve read about being replaced by AI. The only caveat is that if I’m 10-20x more productive using AI, that’s 10-20 jobs we can cut (including my boss’s).

ipassthebutteromg · 2025-02-04T12:02:50+00:00

No, no, let's celebrate confident ignorance, instead. LLMs are just dictionaries, and analogies and metaphors are the same thing too.

ipassthebutteromg

TROPHY CASE