I'm asking the parent about their claim. I already have an opinion about the parent post, in which the author is claiming to have not used an LLM to author a 2025 essay that's illustrated with completely unnecessary AI art. Although one doesn't imply the other, let's say that this diminishes my willingness to believe that claim at face value.
What about the piece the author wrote in 2017 and because of an addition of 23% AI generated text, Pangram labelled it as 100% AI written?