I can’t explicitly state that because I can’t look at the code right now. What I can say is that I would be very surprised if it was. XCheck isn’t meant to be called explicitly by integrity detection. Detection should make its own decision and take the action on the account or content. During action enforcement XCheck is implicitly called.
> The stories are simply incorrect about the cross-check program, which was built to prevent potential over-enforcement mistakes. It has nothing to do with the ability to report posts, as alleged in the article.
Trying to "gotcha" someone being helpful and replying to comments is quite rude. No one working at Facebook would reply yes to that comment, which makes it quite worthless.
Wow, is it not rude to question the intent behind asking for a technical clarification? There is no gotcha here. It's simply asking OP to rule out this very obvious gap that their statement leaves unaddressed. Being helpful != being accurate.
The OP has pretty much said that X-Check tags are not intended to automatically take action on reports.
That is a pretty different thing from saying the people applying the tags don't expect action to be taken, but there could be entire organizations of 1000s of people where those tags serve a different purpose.
Please read the link above for context on how terrible Facebooks data control practices are, wherein this very act could be routinely occurring and OP or anyone making decisive statements would be irresponsible in doing so.
In order to state anything which they know to be true, they must first prove it to themselves. But if it is something which cannot be proven, then of course they cannot know it to be true, and consequently they cannot then honestly state it.
