MG Three Point One enters into his Exaltation

[Rivendale]

How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?

More meat.

[MG 2.0]

"I can feel the table and my hands and everything -- what happened with the Spirit World? Aren't I supposed to go there first and be a missionary?"

"Did you serve a senior's mission in mortality?"

"No but..."

"Not your thing. No big deal. They say we go where we're most comfortable. Everything ultimately works out for each of us."

"True, but I intend to go to the very top. If you try to tell me I'm in the middle but it will 'work out', then I'm not interested. I need you to confirm I'm at the top."

I’m loving this! Pure gold.

The author of this story has made some notable attempts at world-building and exploring complex themes, particularly in the context of an afterlife or spiritual realm. However, there are several areas where character development could be improved:
The protagonist's character feels somewhat one-dimensional: While we get a sense of their thoughts and feelings, we don't know much about their background, motivations, or personality beyond their religious devotion. Adding more depth to their character could make them more relatable and engaging.
Lack of subtlety in dialogue and interactions: The conversations between the protagonist and Zeke often feel forced or unnatural, with characters stating their thoughts and feelings in a way that feels more like exposition than genuine dialogue.
The protagonist's emotional responses feel somewhat predictable and lack nuance: Their reactions to the situations they find themselves in are often extreme or expected, given the context. Adding more complexity to their emotional responses could make their character feel more realistic and engaging.
The supporting character, Zeke, feels more like a plot device than a fully fleshed-out character: While Zeke is charismatic and engaging, we don't know much about his background, motivations, or personality beyond his role as a guide for the protagonist.
The story raises many questions about the world and its rules, but doesn't provide enough context or explanation: The narrative assumes a certain level of familiarity with the world and its rules, which can make it difficult for readers to fully engage with the story.
The protagonist's identity and naming: The protagonist is referred to as "MG" or "G3" without much explanation or context. This could be an interesting aspect of their character, but it feels somewhat arbitrary or convenient without further development.
The narrative jumps abruptly between different scenes and ideas: The story feels somewhat disjointed, with the protagonist's thoughts and experiences jumping between different topics or scenes without much transition or connection.
By addressing these areas, the author could create a more engaging and immersive story with more complex and nuanced characters.
Review by llama A.I.

Ahh...nuance.

I feel like a piece of cardboard.

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

Ahh...nuance.

I feel like a piece of cardboard.

It was a creative response to have an A.I. perform an analysis and I'm sure the author of the piece will appreciate the feedback should the author learn of it. I would, however, be more interested in your reaction. Could you provide an example of something in particular that you felt made any of the characters one dimensional? Could you offer a suggestion about what a character in their situation might do differently to be more fleshed out?

we don't know much about their background, motivations, or personality beyond their religious devotion

Do you think there should be anything in a person's background, motivation, or personality that extends beyond their religious devotion to the only true Church, should the person find that church? Should not every thought, word, and deed testify of Christ? Should not a person's life be a similitude of religious devotion? Have you put a few chapters of 1st Nephi into the A.I. to get an idea of how complex a person's life is from the standpoint of the gospel? How complex is Nephi?

That being said, this is only the first part of the story. Zeke may not have much hope, but It's possible the main character gets fleshed out from the A.I.'s vantage point. I'll be interested in what it says. Though again, I'm more interested in what you think.

[Morley]

Review by llama A.I.

Ahh...nuance.

I feel like a piece of cardboard.

I'm going to guess that your prompting question was somehow lost, again.

[MG 2.0]

Ahh...nuance.

I feel like a piece of cardboard.

I'm going to guess that your prompting question was somehow lost, again.

It was the first time I had used this A.I. on my computer. I didn't create an account, thus I wasn't logged in. And yes, I forgot the inquiry. I will try to be more diligent in remembering to do so.

The truth is, however, that facts are facts. It is those that you have to deal with. Up to this point, Marcus and others have failed to tackle the information/facts head on. They...and you(?)...are merely making an attack on the fact that A.I. is being used to gather information. Sure, it's based on input, but again facts are facts.

They ought to be entertained and engaged rather than ignored.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

I'm going to guess that your prompting question was somehow lost, again.

It was the first time I had used this A.I. on my computer. I didn't create an account, thus I wasn't logged in. And yes, I forgot the inquiry. I will try to be more diligent in remembering to do so.

The truth is, however, that facts are facts. It is those that you have to deal with. Up to this point, Marcus and others have failed to tackle the information/facts head on. They...and you(?)...are merely making an attack on the fact that A.I. is being used to gather information. Sure, it's based on input, but again facts are facts.

They ought to be entertained and engaged rather than ignored.

Regards,
MG

No. Any A.I. response depends on what the input is. Asking you what input generated the resulting A.I. response is not an attack on you.

By the way, A.I. responses are not necessarily facts, any more than personal responses are necessarily facts. A.I. responses are outputs that depend on the nature of the input. But then, you already know this—though you seem to be pretending otherwise.

[MG 2.0]

It was the first time I had used this A.I. on my computer. I didn't create an account, thus I wasn't logged in. And yes, I forgot the inquiry. I will try to be more diligent in remembering to do so.

The truth is, however, that facts are facts. It is those that you have to deal with. Up to this point, Marcus and others have failed to tackle the information/facts head on. They...and you(?)...are merely making an attack on the fact that A.I. is being used to gather information. Sure, it's based on input, but again facts are facts.

They ought to be entertained and engaged rather than ignored.

Regards,
MG

No. Any A.I. response depends on what the input is. Asking you what input generated the resulting A.I. response is not an attack on you.

By the way, A.I. responses are not necessarily facts, any more than personal responses are necessarily facts. A.I. responses are outputs that depend on the nature of the input. But then, you already know this.

Again, I will be more diligent about also including the inquiry.

Moving on...

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

Again, I will be more diligent about also including the inquiry.

Looking forward to it.

[MG 2.0]

Again, I will be more diligent about also including the inquiry.

Looking forward to it.

[Morley]

Moving on...

I'll admit that I sympathize with your repeated desire to dump this topic. You disingenuously claim that A.I. responses are facts, you repeatedly misplace your prompts, and you edit the responses that A.I. does provide without acknowledging that you did so. I would want to move on, too.