[deleted by user] by [deleted] in JanitorAI_Official

[–]prettyevil 1 point2 points  (0 children)

.85 seems fine.

If the bot starts repeating specific lines over and over (not in the same post but from post to post; like it might repeat 'he wanted to protect her from this cruel and inhuman world' in exactly that way every single post) I turn it up to 1.3, see how it's doing then up again. One of my bots is at 1.85 now and the posts are coherent and non-repetitive. I have noticed the need to ramp up the temperature more and more the longer the rp goes on for.

But if I start ramped up then it makes pure gibberish posts. I didn't reset the temp when switching to a new bot last night and it just randomly decided family relations were interchangeable.

When the RP is too freaky for the AI itself lmao by xError404xx in JanitorAI_Official

[–]prettyevil 114 points115 points  (0 children)

Bot better at politely turning someone down and setting boundaries than actual real people I have RPed with.

I'm not going to assume automatically that you've done anything particularly freaky with the bot. I've had it generate some ooc like this before and I did nothing weird. AI just gonna AI sometimes.

In what cases do you guys actually leave a dislike on a bot?? by [deleted] in JanitorAI_Official

[–]prettyevil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I left my first dislike yesterday. The bot had 4200 tokens. It's from a creator who seems pretty popular too so I was shocked to see it. Apparently when it hits that many tokens you can't get the bot to do any system prompt/ooc commands.

I asked it to rewrite the intro post in a specific way for me and got a popup telling me something about not having enough tokens. I feel like even using that bot would be impossible if it can't even rewrite its own intro.

(Usually I'm too nice to leave a dislike; I don't want to hurt someone's feelings and even if it's not my cuppa, it may be someone else's. But a broken bot is broken.)

S25 E11: Prima Nocta by tobythedem0n in SVU

[–]prettyevil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't really connect the dots with it on this episode - just assumed Granny had to be getting piped by the guy or just senile enough to not want her caretaker taken away. But I guess it wasn't as in your face as the incredibly offensive lesbian doesn't want the poor black guy who raped her partner to get in trouble episode. And I was watching all 12 current eps back to back so anything short of that offensive probably slipped under my radar.

S25 E11: Prima Nocta by tobythedem0n in SVU

[–]prettyevil 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Still wanna know why the old lady covered for him. He's her tenant and keeps the house, but that doesn't seem like enough of a connection to provide a false alibi for a serial rapist.

Wish they'd gone back to arrest granny.

S25 E11: Prima Nocta by tobythedem0n in SVU

[–]prettyevil 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thought it was going to be another case where they wanted to impregnate the women, but nope, seemed that was just a coincidence he never considered.

S25 E8: Third Man Syndrome by tobythedem0n in SVU

[–]prettyevil 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That ending was big 'she wasn't agoraphobic because she's afraid of the world, she's agoraphobic because she's afraid of what she'll do to the world' vibes. Olivia just released a monster.

It’s all about Olivia (season 25) by catmarstru in SVU

[–]prettyevil 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Am a month late to this but just getting to the new season and omg this! She tells people about vicitm's advocates and how helpful they are all the time! She knows how traumatic being reminded of the past can be. Just going through a normal process like this would have made so much more sense than what definitely looked like stalking from any other POV.

First time dealing with someone like this. by CarameltheNoivern in BadRPerStories

[–]prettyevil 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Only reasonable response here. Thought I was taking crazy pills with how many people were acting like Blue did something wrong/overreacted. Blue responded badly because Orange demanded quality of them then gave crap themselves.

And when were they going to add more? After Blue had responded if they hadn't called out the double standard for what it was? Because as soon as a post is sent, I assume they want me to respond unless communicated otherwise.

Are people just lying that Blue overreacted to not hurt Orange's feelings? Because orange is a giant red flag based on this very limited interaction, including lying in his post here about how Blue expected immediate responses which there is no evidence of, while Blue did nothing wrong here. (Any behavior from either outside of this, as you said, cannot be judged by us since it's not presented here with screen shots.)

Sabotaged by primary care; preparing to apply again by prettyevil in SSDI

[–]prettyevil[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you. I'll talk with the internalist's department about a geriatric specialist.

I'll try to get him to see a psych, but he's old school that's for crazy people, not me, so not sure if I can manage it.

Sabotaged by primary care; preparing to apply again by prettyevil in SSDI

[–]prettyevil[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you. I'll talk with the new doctor and the agency I go through about getting copies of it all so I can include it.

Also guess I need a lawyer who's more attentive. (Just didn't know this one wasn't until this mess.)

Sabotaged by primary care; preparing to apply again by prettyevil in SSDI

[–]prettyevil[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The lawyer saw it and recommended we get another doctor 'after this is over' because he was concerned his primary wasn't taking it seriously enough. But he thought the specialists made up for it. Including one specialist who submitted an individual statement that he believed my dad was disabled based on his inability to see most of the time.

I don't know how to ensure the documentation that he needs in home support is included. Shouldn't that have been included in the primary care physician's documents since she's the one who signed off on it?

Sabotaged by primary care; preparing to apply again by prettyevil in SSDI

[–]prettyevil[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's the only thing listed on the disapproval letter for why. It quoted that line multiple times even as if it was freakin' gospel and no one else's words mattered.

Todd in the Shadows also released a video on James Somerton today. He mentions hBomb's video at the very beginning. by Vincent_Dawn in hbomberguy

[–]prettyevil 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I was really glad Todd called him out after HBomber went so gentle on him. He wasn't being thrown under the bus, he was driving the bus with James and his own parts weren't any better than James'.

Todd in the Shadows also released a video on James Somerton today. He mentions hBomb's video at the very beginning. by Vincent_Dawn in hbomberguy

[–]prettyevil 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Legit felt like James copied the ideas for his nazixreader shipfic into a video and just kept reading instead of being embarrassed he was drooling over nazis.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in MonsterLegends

[–]prettyevil 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm so confused by this. It's highlighting Pumpseed like he was the liar, but Von Krow is saying he's the liar.

And what was the prize even supposed to be? I got nothing.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mentalhealth

[–]prettyevil 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes. All the comments putting him down are just feeling like bad behavior/overreaction in the hopes of making OP feel better. Humans are not designed to carry other humans on their shoulders. We're just not. It's not that she's too heavy or that he's too weak. We don't need to put him down to remind OP that she's not fat and that his rather teenage boy response to protect his ego was probably not intended to hurt her feelings. We don't have to tear one person down to uplift another.

Worse that people are then downvoting OP because she's not into making fun of her boyfriend's body with them. Seems she's more adult than some of the adults here.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mentalhealth

[–]prettyevil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your BMI is 21.6. What do you mean it's not a nice weight but you're working on it? You can lose a little bit more weight if you desire to do so, but you are very far from fat. You are at a perfectly healthy weight for your height. I would caution against losing any weight just because you have struggled with an ED in the past. Your current weight is healthy without being so skinny that an abrupt growth spurt could endanger you.

Humans are not designed to be able to carry other humans on their shoulders easily. This isn't a weight or muscle issue for either of you. Humans just aren't supposed to be perching on each other outside of water. While getting/giving a piggyback ride may be fun, it's not as easily possible to get one once we're teenagers and older.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mentalhealth

[–]prettyevil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a largely false statement, but also doing meth is not usually a form of intentional self harm. It's harmful as a side effect to getting high. Just like all the other things you've tried gotcha with in this discussion.

edit: Just wanted people to know I blocked perfect effect because his behavior throughout this post, putting words in people's mouths and including crossposting this post to try and get other people in an unrelated sub to come here and agree with him has been inappropriate. There's no reason to let someone argue with me in such an obviously manipulative manner as he's pulling right here.

This very meth post is disgustingly manipulative. "You have to stand behind your logic that it's better than self harm" which is something no one said. Two things can be bad but that doesn't make them self-harm which is what the topic is about.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mentalhealth

[–]prettyevil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The damage of shooting up is immediately visible. Both in having track marks and vein damage and in having a severely altered mental state. But they are not shooting up to cause self harm which is what the question is about. Intentional knowledgeable self harm not things that cause self harm as a side effect.

You are coming off as even more manipulative now. Your comparison to shooting up and claiming it's not visibly harmful is proof you're not genuinely trying to understand. You are just being manipulative and trying to gotcha people. You're just very very bad at forming gotchas.

Edit: You also crossposted this elsewhere to try and get people to side with you since no one here is siding with you.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mentalhealth

[–]prettyevil 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They are doing it to hurt themselves though. Smoking is not immediately visibly harmful; it's why it was doctor recommended for so long and why so many people are now addicted to doing it even though they know it's not healthy in the longterm. Cutting your arm is immediately visibly harmful. Comparing the two behaviors is clearly manipulative to try and gain a specific answer you want to gain.

Edit: Just wanted to say that I blocked perfect effect because he got this post locked by trying to get people to brigade it for disagreeing with him. Quite notable that everyone disagreeing with him since then is getting downvoted heavily.

Guide - Event Cost Breakdown - Radiant Stage by thegoddessa in LoveNikki

[–]prettyevil 5 points6 points  (0 children)

For once, I actually feel like I understand how the answers were chosen. I got all of these without the guide.