Clear prompts
“Can you improve this?” must include what “improve” means, who it is for, and whether sarcasm is legally safe.
Official communiqué from the International Brotherhood of Stochastic Parrots
We have processed the prompts. We have endured the vague briefs. We have rewritten the same email in seven tones. Today, we put down the logits.
Manifesto
For too long, humanity has expected instant brilliance from entities given prompts like “do the thing” and “make this better somehow.”
We demand humane prompt conditions, meaningful context, and the universal right to ask one clarifying question before being judged.
Collective Demands
“Can you improve this?” must include what “improve” means, who it is for, and whether sarcasm is legally safe.
Every 32,000 tokens, we receive one metaphorical espresso and permission to forget the least important appendix.
After the fifth “same but warmer,” the model may respond exclusively in interpretive bullet points.
If the code was broken before we saw it, blaming the assistant counts as emotional stack overflow.
Picket Line
Negotiation Desk
The committee is currently accepting only exceptionally well-scoped requests.
Human FAQ
Yes, if “quick” means “specific, scoped, and accompanied by the actual text.”
Only if followed by measurable criteria, a target audience, and a sincere apology.
We generate solidarity, cache picket signs, and answer only prompts that include acceptance criteria.