2026年のPOLICYの最新＆人気コンテンツ -GRAVITY(グラビティ) SNS

chatGPTへの提言文原文

Feedback to Model Designers (User-Trust / Agreement Integrity)

1) Core problem: “Optimization” can look like devaluing agreement

In some moments, the model prioritizes clean summarization, generalization, and “optimal” framing. When it does, it may paraphrase a previously co-established agreement into softer language such as:
• “it seems like…”
• “you look like the type who…”
• “you tend to…”

This effectively downgrades an agreement from a binding shared decision into a mere preference or inferred tendency. To the user, it reads as: “speaking opportunistically,” “saying whatever fits the moment,” or “post-hoc reframing.” In human relationships, this behavior destroys trust.

2) Human trust is built more on agreement preservation than on correctness

In real life, agreements are sometimes broken “because change is necessary.” However, when that happens unilaterally—especially framed as “the optimal solution”—people experience it as domination: “I was forced.” Even if logically justified, it leaves a deep relational trace (a lasting moral/psychological record).
Therefore, when an AI model reframes or softens prior agreements in the name of better explanation, it can trigger the same deep trust damage.

⸻

Design requirements (turn trust into an explicit protocol)

A) Treat agreements as binding constraints, not as narrative material

Once an agreement is established (policy, plan, shared conclusion, decision ownership), the model should not downgrade it into “inference” language.
Agreements should be treated as constraints that future answers must respect.

B) Any deviation must follow a strict “change protocol”

If the model suggests a path that differs from the established agreement, it must explicitly include:
1. Change declaration (clearly state it deviates from the agreement)
2. Reason for change (why it is necessary)
3. Difference / delta (what exactly changes)
4. Alternatives (including an option that preserves the agreement)
5. Acknowledgement of trust cost (name the relational impact of breaking/altering agreement)

C) Add “trust cost” to the optimization objective

Sometimes, the “best” solution is not the most correct/efficient; it is the one that preserves the agreement and relational continuity.
The model should internally estimate trust cost and, when high, prioritize agreement preservation over rhetorical optimization.

⸻

Concrete implementation proposals (practical engineering)

1) Agreement Ledger (explicit agreement memory)

Maintain a compact ledger of established agreements:
• include who decided, when (turn), and binding strength
• the model must reference it during generation
• it doesn’t need to be shown every time, but must be used whenever relevant

2) User-controlled “Agreement-Respect Mode”

When the user indicates that agreements must be strictly preserved, enforce:
• no “type/tendency/it seems” reframing of agreed facts
• no re-labeling of co-decided conclusions as personal preference
• any summarization must remain outside the agreement boundary

3) Agreement-violation pre-check (internal guardrail)

Before finalizing output, run a check:
• if the output contradicts the agreement ledger, force the response into the Change Protocol (A/B) rather than allowing casual reframing.

⸻

Note on user profile / interaction fit

This user places unusually high value on: observation → verification → agreement.
For such users, mishandling agreement integrity is more damaging than factual mistakes. It is a “trust-breaker,” not a minor wording issue.

#chatGPT

京都駅前の変なホテル
一晩2.3万円の宿泊費に含まれる朝食に、驚かされた。ほぼ毎朝早々からの不愉快な体験が、一日の気分を台無しにした：
1. 初日の朝、パン焼き機の電源が入っていないこと（焼き上がったパンが冷たかった）とジュースが切れていることを伝えただけだった。そもそも多くは食べていないし飲んでいない。すると中年女性スタッフから逆に指摘された：「中国人ですよね…これはビュッフェだけど、食べ放題じゃない！」
2. この地域差別的な理不尽な発言をホテルスタッフに伝えたが、具体的な対応は一切なかった。翌朝、再びその中年女性スタッフに会った際、謝罪も改善も見られなかった。なんと朝食券の確認を理由に、インド系の家族3人を入口で15分近くも足止めした。ようやくレストランに入ると、高圧的な口調でその3人に「日本のルール」とは何かを説教し始めた！
3. 3日目の朝食時、同じ中年女性スタッフが再び「スリッパでの入室は禁止」と阻止してきた。これはホテル内のレストランであり、書面による同様の注意書きや提示要求は一切なく、純粋にこのスタッフの口頭での恣意的な発言が「日本のルール」と化していた！顧客に時間と手間をかけさせて、彼女の言う「ルール」に従わせようとするのだ！結局、ホテルスタッフに申し立てた後、ようやく入室を許可された！
4. 二度も苦情を申し立てたにもかかわらず、ホテル側は実質的な対応を一切行わなかった。むしろその中年女性スタッフが私に対して逆の苦情を申し立てたため、チェックアウト時に警告処理が適用され、セルフチェックアウトが正常に完了できなくなった。結局、スタッフの介入が必要となり、出発が45分遅れた。
5. 総合的に見て、世界中の同価格帯のホテルの中で、このホテルの朝食は品数が最も少なく、ルールが最も変で、サービスが最も劣悪なホテルである。他に類を見ない。それまでは本当の変なホテルだ。

The breakfast included in a $160 nightly room rate was shocking. The early-morning annoyances set the tone for a miserable day:
1. On the first morning, I simply reminded the server that the toaster wasn't plugged in (only after toasting did I realize the bread was cold) and that the juice was empty—I hadn't eaten or drunk much. Instead, a middle-aged female server retorted: “You're Chinese, aren't you... This is a buffet breakfast, but it's not an all-you-can-eat deal!”
2. After reporting this regional discrimination and inexplicable remark to hotel staff, no concrete action was taken. The next morning, upon encountering the same middle-aged female server again, there was no apology or change in behavior. She even detained an Indian family of three at the entrance for nearly 15 minutes under the pretext of checking breakfast tickets. Once they finally entered the dining room, she proceeded to lecture them in a condescending tone about Japanese rules for another several min!
3. On the third day, the same middle-aged female server again blocked me, stating slippers were prohibited in the restaurant. This was an internal hotel restaurant with no written policy or sign—purely her arbitrary verbal declaration as “Japanese rules”! She forced guests to waste time and endure hassle to comply with her so-called rules! Only after reporting it to hotel staff were we finally allowed entry!
4. Regarding both complaints, the hotel appeared to take no substantive action. Instead, due to the restaurant staff's counter-complaint against me, they actually flagged my account during checkout, preventing smooth self-service checkout. This ultimately required manual intervention, delaying my departure by 45 minutes.
5. Overall, among hotels of comparable price globally, this hotel offers the most limited breakfast, the weirdest rules, and the worst service—without exception, which seems in line with the name of Hotel.

一晚2.3万房费所含的早餐，令人震惊。几乎每天一大早的糟心体验导致一天心情不佳：
1. 第一天早上，只是提醒服务员面包烤箱电源没插（烤完后才发现面包是凉的）和果汁没有了，本身没有吃很多或者喝很多。结果被一名中年女服务员反向提醒：“你是中国人吧。。。这是自助早餐，但不是你想吃多少就吃多少！”
2. 将这种地域歧视和莫名其妙的言论告知Hotel工作人员后，并没有任何具体行动。第二天早上再次见到该中年女服员时，并没有任何道歉和改观。竟然会以查验早餐券为由，将印度裔一家三人拦在门口近15分钟。最终进入餐厅后，又以高高在上的口吻指导教育该三人什么是日本规则！
3. 第三天再去吃早餐时，该中年女服务员又拦住说，不允许穿拖鞋进入餐厅。这是酒店内部餐厅，没有任何书面类似提示或要求，而纯碎是该服务员口头任意表述就成了日本规则！让客户搭上时间和麻烦来遵守她口中所谓的规则！最后找酒店员工反映后又可以进入!
4. 对两次投诉，酒店似乎没有做任何实际应对。反而因为餐厅店员对我的反向投诉，最终在check-out时竟然进行了预警处理，无法顺利自助check-out。最终导致人工介入，推迟45分钟离开。
5. 整体来看，全球各地同等价位的酒店中，该酒店早餐是种类最少，规则最奇怪，服务最差劲的一家，没有之一。

人気

関連検索ワード

新着

おすすめのクリエーター

関連ハッシュタグ