[vessenes]

Man, I hated last year’s clanker-tone, and I hate this one’s too by now. I don’t want to read the word load-bearing ever again.

The reminder that there’s structure and content and they’re different is a good one. Even a small legal document has this microstructure of references, inside, outside explicitly and outside by inference.

[bonoboTP]

Yes, at this point I can't read this kind of AI text recreationally. It is somewhat fine when I ask Claude Code to explain to me something about a codebase or to summarize and collate info and it comes out in this shape. But if you're a human and you have some human idea that you want to share, don't come to me with AI text. If you do, I don't believe that the ideas are well thought out and come from thorough human thinking and life experience. If I want to consult AI on its understanding of the law, I'll ask it myself.

If it's your ideas, at least share the bullet points of the prompt it was generated from.

[ekns]

I get it, it's not ideal. Yet there is no one else doing this work so I put effort where I think it's most neglected - which isn't fully refined prose, imo.

[vessenes]

I appreciate the work! And I hear you; writing is a lot of work, especially if you don’t need the benefits of synthesis it gives the writer.

I’ve cadged some rules somewhere for de-LLMing the text; if I can find them I’ll post a follow up link. They don’t help with structure though - and I think this is arguably the most important bit - taking the reader through a logical progression. I didn’t read carefully enough to opine on your structure, but again, thanks for doing this!

[mishellaneous]

some people would, in this case, prefer the unrefined version