I think the complaint most folks have for people posting ChatGPT responses is that it adds nothing 'human' to the conversation.
It's sort of like copy and pasting a wikipedia article into a comment, which in itself isn't necessarily wrong. The 'wikipedia' comment however does comes off as an impersonal PSA that also happens to be citing a newfangled encyclopedia that makes an easy target for ire.
If you care to accommodate those who seemingly don't care to accommodate you, try phrasing your messages connect it in some way to the conversation with a couple of sentences about how that information changed your perspective or helped you understand something. That way, rather than making an announcement containing the definition of a word or concept, you're participating in the discourse as an active participant.
It's sort of like copy and pasting a wikipedia article into a comment, which in itself isn't necessarily wrong. The 'wikipedia' comment however does comes off as an impersonal PSA that also happens to be citing a newfangled encyclopedia that makes an easy target for ire.
If you care to accommodate those who seemingly don't care to accommodate you, try phrasing your messages connect it in some way to the conversation with a couple of sentences about how that information changed your perspective or helped you understand something. That way, rather than making an announcement containing the definition of a word or concept, you're participating in the discourse as an active participant.