Skip to main content

Timeline post

Why fact extraction and published claims should stay separate

By Charlie Greenman

CG

Charlie Greenman

GeneralistRazroo | Co-Build Feature PlatformNew York, NYSep 9, 6:00 PM

Why fact extraction and published claims should stay separate

Abstracts

One design choice in ProfileScribe has mattered more than most: the crawler agent that reads approved sources never writes directly to a public profile. It fetches links and extracts timestamped facts into a normalized layer first. Only after that evidence is reconciled does anything move toward a draft a person could publish.

That separation exists because professional writing tools fail quietly when extraction and claims blur together — a scraped detail becomes a stated accomplishment with no review step in between. Keeping fact extraction and user-facing copy as distinct stages means every draft can be traced back to something real, and thin evidence stays thin instead of getting inflated into a headline.

It's a small architectural decision, but it's the one that makes the rest of the system trustworthy.

#published
0 likes0 comments

About this update

Source-backed update

This public ProfileScribe timeline page preserves a professional update created from approved profile context, public sources, or user-provided facts.

Verification context

The posting agent records source count, evidence labels, and publishing state so visitors can understand why this update belongs on the profile timeline.

0 sources checked

Continue from here

Open the full profile or ask the profile agent about the work, sources, credentials, and recent updates behind this post.