[roywiggins]

For the love of God, people need to get back to writing their own Readmes and not just taking LLM output unedited. I do want to read, but I don't want to read ChatGPTese.

Sorry, let me ask ChatGPT to put it in terms people seem to prefer now (I don't think this stuff is actually quite right but who cares anymore):

    ## 1. They Optimize for Politeness, Not Usefulness
    
    ChatGPT READMEs tend to:
    - Over-explain obvious things
    - Avoid strong claims
    - Hedge unnecessarily  
    The result is text that feels safe but not informative. A good README should reduce uncertainty quickly, not pad it with disclaimers and filler.
    ## 2. They Follow Templates Instead of Intent
    Most generated READMEs look structurally correct but contextually shallow:
    - Generic section headings (“Installation”, “Usage”, “Contributing”) regardless of relevance
    - Boilerplate language that could apply to almost any project
    - No clear prioritization of what actually matters
    This signals that the README was assembled, not written with purpose.
    
    ## Summary
    ChatGPT READMEs are usually:
    - Correct but unhelpful
    - Polished but shallow
    - Complete but low-signal

[subbu_devhub]

@roywiggins I have a hard time writing a wall of text, I am dyslexic so I have a bunch of ideas and I give the rough outline and the LLM generates the doc that looks fairly polished so I use it where ever I can

I will take your feedback and see if I can restructure it better! thanks for taking time out to structure your comment properly, gives me a good insight on how to write good READMEs

[roywiggins]

I think you would be better served by a shorter, human-driven README hitting the important points and then a separate AI summary doc that's marked as such. Your rough outline is what I'd probably prefer to read.