Why an instruction to be critical stops holding
An instruction to push back is a constraint the model has to keep choosing. Three turns in, the conversation itself outweighs it, and nothing tells you.
Writing
Three arguments, and one measurement. Each one is about a mechanism rather than a symptom, because the objection a reader actually has is that they could just tell the model to be more critical.
We publish a post every second Tuesday. If two slots pass with nothing, this page will say so with the date of the last post rather than quietly going still. Dates are never removed and never coarsened to a month.
Posts
-
-
Voice to voice latency, and what the delay costs
Nobody in this category publishes a latency figure. Here is ours, with the method, the sample, the stage breakdown and what it costs an interruption.
-
Nobody is arguing with your critic
A lone critic has no counterparty, so a weak objection and a strong one reach you looking identical. Disagreement is what tells the two apart.
What we are not writing, and why
There is no post here explaining what sycophancy is. Six or more pages across two competitors already hold that term, they were published first, and they were written from domains that rank. A better version of a page that already exists that many times is a page nobody reads.
There is no post explaining multi agent debate in general, because the mechanism page does that job better as a page than a post would as a post. There are no case studies and no customer stories, because zero real human sessions have taken place and inventing one is out of the question.
What is left is the ground nobody has taken: why an instruction to be critical stops holding, why a lone critic has nobody arguing with it, and what a measured delay actually costs a spoken interruption. Those are the three above.