Editing Openai/6973e373-2b8c-800d-84b7-d7001cfc6bac (section)

==== SR1. “Third party chiming in.” ====
Not an argument — just positioning.

SR2. “The original statement that the OP post is too long is very valid criticism.”
* What it’s claiming: Greg’s “too long” critique is legitimate.
* Status: Contested
* Why: OP has already argued length is justified because it’s a pinned “full guide” with necessary context (OP-B1–B7). Those are challenges to “too long is valid.”
* Are OP’s challenges standing (unquestioned)? Not anymore, because SReflection is now challenging them back with additional reasons (see SR4–SR9). That moves this from “in question” (Greg) to a live dispute.

SR3. “The post feels like AI-generated content that hasn’t been pruned down.”
* Status: Unquestioned (so far)
* Why: No one in the provided text has directly rebutted “it’s AI-generated” or “it’s unpruned.” OP hasn’t said “I wrote it myself” or “it wasn’t AI” or “it was heavily edited.”
* Important nuance: it’s still a claim, but within this thread it currently has no direct counterargument.

SR4. “This is almost immediately obvious to anyone who’s used an AI model.”
* Status: Unquestioned (so far)
* Why: Nobody has challenged the “obviousness” claim yet. It’s also a broad generalization, but it’s not disputed in-thread.

SR5. “If you didn’t put time into writing/editing it, people will feel it isn’t worth their time.”
* Status: Unquestioned (so far)
* Why: OP hasn’t directly countered the “you didn’t put in time” premise, nor the implied reciprocity norm (“effort signals respect for readers’ time”).
* Note: This is partly conditional (“if”), but it still carries an implied accusation that OP likely didn’t invest time.