| AT is supposed to double its current program size over the next years. |
You are 100% lying. Please give us a timestamp of a single student saying that they oppose the move. |
PP didn’t say they oppose the move, but that AT doesn’t support the move. That’s the veiled dissatisfaction the LLM identified; their comments reveal their trepidation but they want to be supportive in general. |
Wrong. PP repeatedly said that the AT kids opposed the move. "Well. AT students are speaking now in opposition to the move." "Last night’s comments before school board were opposed" "Arlington Tech's ugly opposition to keeping out "those kids" from Langston. Trying to hoard opportunity and not share the nice new building. Not nice, AT, not nice. And we can all see it." "Arl Tech opposing Langston coming and Langston saying they want to come" "4 AT kids spoke and all were against the move of Langston to their building. " "You can watch for yourself the 4 AT students opposing the move" "AT is working to keep Langston out" "Well they already did. One from each class at AT did this very thing." (re: "You think some teenager is going to stand up in public and announce “i don’t want those kids and adults” at our school?") |
I asked a school board member if adding this additional program would reduce the number of seats at AT and she looked at me like I was crazy and said no, so the campus will either hold an additional 100 students than they stated or they never considered this (I’m guessing the latter) |
Not one of them spoke in favor of it. Not one. |
[code]
Not one of the AT students was opposed to the move. They clearly said it's "not about opposing it" and the Langston students were "more than welcome" to join them at Grace Hopper. They all asked for more transparency around the details for how the programs will fit in the space and interact and they also asked the board to delay the decision until the planning was better hashed out. None opposed the move. |
First you left a lot out of your selective summary. But even so does this sound like support for the move? It’s clearly not. Why are you working so hard to pretend that that AT doesn’t oppose this OP? Just own it. |
You sound obsessed |
This was AI summary, copy and paste so it should not have too much bias (though I guess prompt engineering could steer it a but?). - DP |
| Not supporting the move as currently proposed is not the same as opposing it. they are looking for more details and reassurance that their program will not have substantial changes which is reasonable |
| People can watch the meeting for themselves. I think we need to ignore the person who is so dug in. The real question I think it’s important to ask is why didn’t this proposal come much sooner in the process? If the goal is really to increase access for Langston students why did that just come up in the last six months? What are they planning on doing with the Langston building? APS is not being honest about the reason for this change. |
Clearly the prompt had an agenda. |
I hate liars. |
Exactly. They wanted details about the transition; they clearly said they didn’t oppose the move itself. |