[nlawalker]

>Also I just find it a little insulting if someone sends me an AI response. I don’t know why, maybe because it feels not genuine.

It's because it's a pretty safe bet that the prompt either implicitly or explicitly says "I don't really care," and the act of using AI to generate the response is almost entirely an effort to conceal that.

[emodendroket]

I don't think that's a safe bet at all; the choice to put the message to an AI may express a desire, however misguided, to produce a "better" (clearer, less likely to cause offense, whatever) message than the author feels able to manage unaided.

[luckylion]

Of all the times someone used AI and did not disclose it, I've never found it to be a desire to be better, it was always a desire to do 5 minutes of work and still have a result that looks like you spent multiple hours. Except it only looks that way at a glance, it's usually bad because that type of person does not care, so their prompts are bad, and they don't care to even read the results.

In my experience, the people who actually wanted to improve the presentation of their messages are upfront about it and clearly say they're using AI to organize their thoughts or polish their english.

[nlawalker]

Yeah my comment was maybe a bit too snarky. I am personally a huge believer in assuming good faith and intent and giving people the benefit of the doubt, it’s just that when it comes to this, I’ve been in many situations where I have enough context that, even though I don’t have proof, I don’t have much doubt either.