In this reply, the poster is criticizing what they see as a logical misrepresentation: they say that “suggested” is not the same as “they’re aware”, and invoking the principle of identity means that a thing should be treated as exactly what it is, not as something slightly different. In other words, they are accusing the other person of changing the meaning of the original statement and asking for more precision and fairness in wording. The tone is frustrated and sarcastic, but the core point is about sticking to the exact meaning of terms in logic and discussion.
Sorry for the confusion! OpenAI is aware of the situation and pointed out that it already had a status page… in Codex CLI. That’s when @vb suggested adding a Codex App category too.
And, @PaulBellow , do not be so shy with you - it’s not about “more clear” , it’s about being or pretty dump or manipulative.
Or, to make it sound nice, it’s about not paying a minimum attention to the first of the 3 pillars of the rationality - if you cannot handle principle of identity, what can you handle?!
*
Even the AI models cannot understand that principle of identity: it’s not about “same thing” , it’s about the “identity of the thing” which is unique, ma’ friend. “Same thing” can be more - same things. But identity is unique.
