Comment by armchairhacker

Your comments don't read like LLM-slop to me.

An occasional "it's not X, it's Y", rule of three, or em-dash isn't atypical nor intrinsically bad writing. LLM-slop stands out because of the frequency of those and other subliminal cues. And LLM-slop is bad writing, at least to me, because:

- It's not unique (like how generic art is bad compared to distinct artstyles)

- It's faux-authentic ("how do you do, fellow kids?")

- It's extremely shallow in information. Phrases like "here's the kicker" and "let that sink in" are wasted words

- The meaning is "fuzzy". It's hard to describe, but connotations and figurative language are "off" (inconsistent to the larger idea? Like they were picked randomly from a subset of acceptable candidates...); so I can't get information from them, and it's hard to form in my mind what the LLM is trying to convey (perhaps because the words didn't come from a human mind)

- It doesn't always have good organization: some parts seem to go on and on, high-level ideas drift, and occasionally previous points are contradicted. But I suspect a plan+write process would significantly reduce these issues