Sounds like he's using ChatGPT as a sounding board/extra "person" to talk to about philosophy. I don't see the appeal of talking philosophy with ChatGPT but it seems innocent enough. Although as Lowri says I suppose there might be a legal angle.

The goal is to flood the site with stuff about god.

@JonathanZ god is part and parcel of philosophy whether you like it or not. Regardless of his intentions, or whether or not the concept of god annoys you, that is not a valid complaint. And there is nothing in the site that disallows him from asking questions about god. Last but not least, to the OP, the title of this question is addressing a specific user, which seems contrary to the purposes of this site. Using the words “you” and “your” doesn’t help your case.

It's not a complaint, it's a description and an answer to the question in the title, and as a description it's valid. What people choose to do about it is up to them.

Not sure if this question to another member belongs to meta.

@Jo Wheler - I noticed the same thing. I decided to let it go, but I do have the same questions as you have. It's also kind of strange how user80226 and Syed always seem to go in tandem -- as if one person created two accounts for two persona. But if so, I guess Kierkegaard did the same in his days...

@mudskipper I agree with your observation.

@mudskipper we have opposing positions on almost everything. The only similarity is that we both post a lot of questions. But believe me, we are not the same person

@MauroALLEGRANZA - Thx. I'm going to take your advise to heart.

A reminder that since comments are frequently deleted as part of clean-up (and not preserved in the edit history), it might be worth copying relevant things into block-quotes if you're asking about them.

@Dcleve - I've got my own (differing) speculations about which accounts have the same person behind them, and while it'd be fun to discuss it, debating them in the open seems to turn sour fairly quickly, and any actionable thoughts are probably best handled by DM to the mods. So me, I'm not going to pursue that line.

@JonathanZ -- I had not intended to re-open "who is really who" discussions. Instead I was trying to disentangle "excess threads about" from exclusively "God", note the Chat GPT may have been more innocent than speculation has implied here, and also note your irritation on the subject was likely due to a series of offenders, not just one. Whether the series might actually be just one --.I will leave for another day.

@Syed: Stack exchange's policy on handling of comments has been discussed elsewhere. Briefly, comments are considered to exist for purposes of suggesting ways to improve a question or answer, and are not guaranteed to persist. Moderators are allowed to trim away comment threads, or individual comments, that they do not think are contributing toward that goal. If you want something to persist in the SE record rather than being a transient thought, make it an answer or a new question, or perhaps take it to chat. ("Perhaps" because I honestly don't know what policies apply to chat.)

@Dcleve- Ah, okay, understood. I agree that there's more than one account that tries to flood the site with their own agenda, some overlapping with the one currently being discussed, and some not.

@keshlam yes I’ve seen that, it just seems very selective, since my comment responding to Jonathan was removed but not any responses back to me, even though multiple users are continuously allowed to personally target me with none of those comments removed

@Dcleve I rarely ever post about math, logic, or abstractions. All these armchair accusations should be taken with a grain of salt. The moderators have more tools than anyone else at their disposal and if they thought me and user80226 were the same people, they would have clearly said so