People value and respect human creativity, and are willing to pay for it. People also have an aversion to anything they view as “fake.” I think the recent AI revolution overlooked this.
- 2
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
As for my own emotions? I’m neutral. It’s not my role to argue about this, and I’m certainly not complaining about complaints—so why assume I am? I’ve mentioned it several times—curiosity, remember? Pure curiosity about emotions. My point is to understand why people react the way they do, not to dismiss their views. Why is that curiosity being interpreted as taking a stance? For me, it's worth exploring how emotions influence debates.
In general, a lot of arguments arise because people assume bad intent where there is none. Acknowledging emotions helps us understand why people say what they say, reducing unnecessary hostility. It’s also a good way to reflect on our own biases and reactions.
- Why do certain topics trigger us?
- Do we truly ponder whether we are being objective, or are our emotions influencing how we argue?
If one has read psychology or philosophy books on self-reflection, emotions, and their importance in being social—works that explore how logic and emotions work, why they exist from an evolutionary perspective, and how to manage stress or handle negative feelings—they’d understand that these questions need to be asked every time we engage with others or even in our internal monologue. This approach helps improve our understanding of ourselves first and foremost
That said, wouldn’t you feel frustrated if your words kept being twisted, or if people assumed you had a hidden agenda when you didn’t? It’s disheartening, and sometimes it makes me want to step back.
As for that chatbot comment—you’re free to think what you like. But just because my English isn’t ‘plain’ doesn’t make it artificial. Doesn’t it make sense that someone learning a language would aim for the most comprehensive version rather than restricting themselves to the simplest form? I didn’t grow up in an English-speaking country, and I don’t use English in my daily life. However, when I decided to learn, I chose to focus on formal English because it provides a much broader understanding—of articles, philosophy, and deeper discussions.
Wouldn’t limiting yourself to simple English be a huge restriction? Of course, if all I wanted to do was say basic sentences like ‘I want to sleep’ or ‘I’m going to eat,’ that would be fine. But isn’t that just scratching the surface of what language truly is? If you’ve ever learned another language, you’d know that courses and teachers always begin with the formal version first, as that’s what helps you genuinely understand the language. In this situation, the most pragmatic choice is to opt for the most comprehensive version of a foreign language, as it provides the broadest understanding. You know, we do not have a few hundred lifetimes.
Anyway, I hope that clears things up and satisfies your curiosity.
- 1
The fact that you chose this particular topic to ask people about their emotions, rather than all the thousands of others on the forum, could be taken to imply that your motivations relate to AI rather than merely curiosity about emotions, particularly since the topic of AI clearly has some relevance to you (see below). Perhaps, if you are curious about emotions, it would be better to ask about them in a thread where AI is not involved, so people can't accuse you of focusing on it. There's plenty of emotion in the arguments about game design on these forums, after all.
I don't say that you have used a chatbot because of your syntax; I say it because your links in a post on the Project Caesar forum (now deleted but preserved as a quotation) included "utm_source=chatgpt.com" in their url. I have no way of knowing whether you are still doing it, hence the question (which, incidentally, you didn't actually answer).
- 3
Alright, I’ll lay this out clearly one last time.
You’re implying something based on a few premises that might seem solid at first glance, but they’re just assumptions. What do you actually know about my posts on other forums or platforms? Absolutely nothing. To satisfy your apparent need to scrutinize why I do what I do, let me make it clear: this was my first time asking about emotions on the Paradox forum. In my real life, I use this method to understand how people express themselves emotionally in conversations. Online, however, I’ve found it incredibly difficult to apply because so many crucial cues—gestures, facial expressions, tone of voice—are missing. These elements are fundamental in deciphering emotions in face-to-face interactions, which is why psychologists generally don’t conduct serious analyses through online threads. Their professional guidelines recognize this limitation, and I see the same issue here. I can’t fully interpret what you’re saying, I can’t gauge your intent or emotions—just bare letters on a screen. That’s not a healthy way to engage with such a deep topic.
Beyond that, the reason I made the original post wasn’t just idle curiosity. It was an observation of how discussions about AI seem to escalate into frustration and hostility. We’ve seen a sharp increase in toxicity lately, and I wanted to examine whether emotional reactions—anger, frustration—were driving these conversations rather than rational debate. Did you notice how the moderators responded initially, compared to how the community reacted later? That shift intrigued me. I asked myself,
- "Why do people react like this?
- Why do they care so much about a company’s decisions?
- And why did the company’s employee seem so defensive without offering real, well-founded acknowledgment?"
Now, regarding AI: I see no fundamental difference between searching something on Google and using ChatGPT (or another AI) while browsing for information. If a URL contains "chatgpt.com" or another AI-related source, that doesn’t automatically mean the content was generated autonomously by AI. I use AI solely to refine my syntax, nothing more. If you have further questions about that,
- I honestly don’t feel obligated to keep proving myself to anonymous strangers.
- Who even are you to demand an explanation from me? That is to say, I don’t see why I need to justify myself to a random person online.
- Do I have to repeat this a hundred times for every thread I post?
You have no authority to dictate what others should or shouldn’t use. I respect your opinions, but I also don’t appreciate how you cherry-pick things from my profile while ignoring the broader context. It’s exhausting, and I have no interest in continuing this conversation. I’ve shared here how I feel. Additionally, unless you’re a public prosecutor with an actual legal reason to question me, don’t expect another reply. If AI use offends you that much, maybe start a petition instead of digging through my posts. In other words, take it up with the forum rules, not me because I have no authority here.
At this point, I’m done. I have better things to do than to keep revisiting this. I refuse to waste more of my time thinking about an anonymous person’s opinions when their approach is more confrontational than constructive. This adds unnecessary stress to my life, and I already have enough of that. I’m not going to spend another second trying to satisfy someone else’s random considerations.
I understand that, from an evolutionary psychology perspective, it's difficult to accept everyone's behaviour, tone, or way of expressing themselves. Make no mistake, I'm not perfect, mate. There are moments when I find myself struggling with it, too, but I consciously make an effort to reflect on my actions and strive to improve. However, I believe there has to be room for tolerance and mercy. It's impossible to agree with everything someone does, but still, we need to respect others' differences without making judgments.
With that said,
if you disagree with my tone while others accept it, with all due respect, that’s your issue, not mine. If you want everyone to use plain English, then push for a forum rule enforcing it. If you think AI-assisted translation should be banned, then you’ll need actual authority to enforce that. But honestly, I feel sorry for people like you—those who struggle to accept that others might communicate differently.
I feel like I'm stuck in a never-ending cycle; hence, I won’t be engaging with this further. Don’t expect another response. This is where I stand, and I’m not entertaining further back-and-forth.
- 1