I’m very glad someone has put a name to this behaviour. I sometimes do it on my blog because user-model interaction is often part of how I think, but I don’t think I ever do this in communication with others for precisely this reason:
Too often I ask a question in Slack or leave feedback under a merge/pull request or argue with friends in a WhatsApp group and get back:
Claude said: [giant response verbatim] Please don’t do this. I mean, I’ve done this. But I’ve been on the receiving end too many times now. This is not adding value. I can talk to Claude myself. It’s going to be faster and I get to control the context. I don’t need a meat proxy in between.
Reading AI output is extra effort. It’s verbose, frequently contains all too plausible nonsense, and is increasingly jargon dense. I recently got this sentence from Claude:
NATS control-plane events: stream leader election / R3 quorum re-form during pod churn.
Jesus. I had to lookup almost every word to make sense of this.
By all means, prompt AI. But don’t just relay the output. Read it, understand it, validate it, and then write a response in your own words (a decent certificate that you’ve done the prior steps). Making that effort is value you can add.
[https://gruhn.me/blog/2026-08-03/]
If I do ever slip into doing this, I think I’m going to stop now I’ve got a name for it.