I have never encountered this behaviour in general so I can't comment on OP's blog by directc experience.

Am i just lucky?

I use many models for mostly coding, about 10 on trial/rotation, and 3 main sota.

It's unquestionable that models have different ways of interaction+harnesses (personalities as some say).

People have very strong feelings about this but their reports are always lacking the full evidence of the interaction, including system prompt, harness and customized instruction included. I suspect that a perfectly normal chat spirals down in argument because the user actively participates in the loop.

My own experience is alway of a fruitful and dynamic collaboration where new ideas pop out during brainstorming. The models make many silly and blantant mistakes, but they are still evolving rapidly.

Grill-mes and Adversarial reviews are my favourite way to brainstorm various phases of the project and even in that context we are cool.

Just start a new chat with a reframe and clearer ideas.

And if the user is asking for somethin unreasonable, do you really think it's better a pushback or a yes-man agent?

Do you remember the fad "swear at them, insult! and they'll work better".