There is plenty of text related stuff that any LLM does better than most people on Lemmy. To include writing comments, essays, and probably poetry to be honest because people are ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE at meter and counting syllables.

My issue is that when I read, I'm doing it to update my perspective on things. Web comments, even if they are poorly considered or written, contain information about how people think or feel about stuff; for instance your comment here references a post you saw recently and uses it to give more context to your argument. But say your comment had been AI generated, and done well enough that I can't tell the difference - now I believe that post existed, and that someone had this reaction to it, but in this scenario that would have been all made up, and what I believe has been distorted a little further away from reality, and my judgment has gotten a little bit worse.

When I see articles here that appear to be written by AI, it doesn't help if it meets heuristic standards of writing quality, what matters is that its references are fake and the context of its arguments are kept deliberately vague to mask how it is devoid of salient information. Having well organized rhetoric just makes this take longer to figure out, misinformation isn't made better by being more convincing. I agree with you that people can be a little too dogmatic about rejecting anything with any sort of connection to AI, but it isn't as simple as, if you enjoy it it must be good.