Okay but why does the first supposed link to the paper go to a tweet? 🤦🏻‍♀️

Uggh it's still going on and now he's got a friend helping him edit the other formats. Meanwhile GR is still "investigating." 🤦🏻‍♀️

This was the KB thing. I had this up on TT and YT for a couple of days then made them private.

youtu.be/PInmDoZqm3c?...

No it's fine. There's no details, and I might still need help.

IDK why, but this and the Kat Blaque thing have been the most intensely triggering things to have happened to me in the last year. I think it has something to do with agency? A feeling like others are flexing their power to keep me from moving forward?

I appreciate the support and concern. The whole thing is kind of crazy-making.

Saw your FB post but can't seem to contact you there. Just so you know, I took down my thread here because I was worried about it somehow I flaming the situation more. GR support says they are "investigating the situation." IDK why it needs an investigation, but hopefully something good will result.

A lot of people have missed it somehow—we’d appreciate help getting the word out!

Thanks. It's not GR as a whole I don't think. I did get a helpful responsible from their support team. They corrected the title. But he immediately reverted their edit.

I did point out to him that he was being creepy and inappropriate, and he called me delusional and said I couldn't control who replied to me.

I would love it if someday a human would do a similar analysis, but I expect that'll be awhile.

So there you have it, folks. I let a robot read my book and I learned some interesting things.

If reading this made you want to read it, you can order it here:

thornapplepress.ca/books/more-t...

It produced similar tables for the chapters on rules & agreements and hierarchy and primary/secondary polyamory, but the summaries were most useful.

Anyway, once we course corrected (I scolded it a bit and it promised not to make up any more stuff), it produced some interesting tables comparing concepts for a few key chapters.

Here's the one for the two chapters on communication.

(Also, since when does ChatGPT care about copyright?)

It created tables of "quotes" from the two works that looked just a little off. After I looked for and didn't find a couple of them in the PDFs, I asked ChatGPT what was up, and it admitted it had been paraphrasing.

Oh those quotation marks? That just meant it was copying the *style*. Oops!