[WoodenChair]

I understand this if you’re not a native speaker. But if you are, I think this will generally make you sound wooden.

[krapp]

To be fair, comments here are graded on kindness, civility, curiosity, intellectual gravity, technical merit, novelty, thoughtfulness, substantiveness, objective fact, not fulminating, not cross examining, steelmanning vs strawmanning, not containing memes, not containing humor, not expressing positive emotion, not expressing negative emotion, not being snarky, sneering, overly cynical, not cynical enough, being "curmudgeonly", class bias, political bias, religious bias, cultural bias, not using "flamewar style" and many other heuristics.

If you followed all of the guidelines for comments to the letter, you would wind up sounding wooden, if not entirely like an AI.

[readthenotes1]

Perplexity did this to your response. I'm not sure that correcting grammar and changing one word makes it sound wooden.

"I understand this if you’re not a native speaker, but if you are, it will generally make you sound a bit unnatural."

[ShroudedNight]

"I think" is explicitly disclaiming authority. Omitting it changes the social signaling of the response significantly.

Switching "wooden" for "a bit unnatural" also does a disservice: "wooden" describes a specific quality of deviance.

Over-all, I would definitely consider the revision stiffer and more reserved than the original.

[WD-42]

“Wooden” is much richer and unique than “a bit unnatural” so yes the ai version does sound more like a robot.