Again, a weird oversimplification of the issue. First of all, they don't even say which detector was used. Nor do they say what part of the Constitution they put in there (its a fairly long body of text). Let's run it through the gamut of detectors for fun (going up to the max. characters allowed):

1. openai.com: N/A
2. writer.com: 88% human-generated content
3. contentscale.ai: 60% - likely both AI and human
4. writefull.com: 2% likely this comes from ChatGPT
5. hivemoderation.com: 0% - not likely to contain AI generated text
6. paraphrasingtool.ai: Text may contain AI-written sentences

So in this instance, only 2 detectors returned results that could be construed as "false positives," 3 and 6.

The TA in the Reddit post should consider ditching whatever detector they were using (its not one of these 6) and use my method of creating mass averages instead.

One thing for sure is it seems unfair to rely solely on one detector. But if I had to, I would chose Hive Moderation as it hasn't returned an incorrect answer yet.