Appreciate the feedback, will try to iterate it to greatness further. It's still a bit hit or miss, but I've made a few improvements:

- improved prompts with your feedback

- added post/comment shuffling to remove recency bias

- tried to fix the speech attribution errors in the xkcd

Perhaps it should also avoid putting too much emphasis on several comments to the same story: there was a story about VAT changes in Denmark, where I participated with several comments; but the generator decided that I apparently had a high focus vat, when I just wanted to provide some clarifying context to that story. I wonder how comments are weighed, is it individually or per story?

Specifically this roast:

> You have commented about the specific nuances of Danish VAT and accounting system hardcoding at least four times, proving you are the only person on Earth who finds tax infrastructure more exciting than the books being taxed.

Yeah, but I did it on the same story (i.e. context).

Though the other details it picked up, I cannot really argue with: the VAT bit just stood out to me.