Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note

2024-01-14 04:58:11 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING

The current notes are irrelevant and should be downvoted. One just states chemical attacks occurred, but not by whom. The other focuses on a single investigation, which whistleblowers exposed to be biased, and misses much stronger evidence like this: https://twitter.com/Rootclaim/status/1405891184443199488

Written by 3D796FBA5AB9F34574F8BE224CB036A6F0E2317EF7A594DBDCB8679B4F2BBC98
Participant Details

Original Tweet

Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1745877150601744602

Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.

All Information

  • ID - 1746396267021000947
  • noteId - 1746396267021000947
  • participantId -
  • noteAuthorParticipantId - 3D796FBA5AB9F34574F8BE224CB036A6F0E2317EF7A594DBDCB8679B4F2BBC98 Participant Details
  • createdAtMillis - 1705208291189
  • tweetId - 1745877150601744602
  • classification - NOT_MISLEADING
  • believable -
  • harmful -
  • validationDifficulty -
  • misleadingOther - 0
  • misleadingFactualError - 0
  • misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
  • misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
  • misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
  • misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
  • misleadingSatire - 0
  • notMisleadingOther - 0
  • notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 1
  • notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
  • notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
  • notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
  • trustworthySources - 1
  • summary
    • The current notes are irrelevant and should be downvoted. One just states chemical attacks occurred, but not by whom. The other focuses on a single investigation, which whistleblowers exposed to be biased, and misses much stronger evidence like this: https://twitter.com/Rootclaim/status/1405891184443199488

Note Status History

createdAt timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus firstNonNMRStatus timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus currentStatus timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus mostRecentNonNMRStatus participantId
2024-01-14 04:58:11 UTC
(1705208291189)
2024-01-14 09:28:38 UTC
(1705224518908)
CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL 2024-01-16 02:06:06 UTC
(1705370766943)
CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL 2024-01-14 09:28:38 UTC
(1705224518908)
CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL

Note Ratings

rated at rated by
2024-01-14 11:50:13 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 11:05:40 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 09:52:15 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 08:18:00 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 07:29:47 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 07:10:39 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 05:43:40 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 02:45:34 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 02:45:02 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 02:07:27 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 00:13:34 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-13 23:28:32 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 10:33:54 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 10:28:23 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 09:08:02 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 08:31:45 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 04:29:42 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 04:24:02 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 03:42:00 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 03:12:59 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 03:04:24 -0600 Rating Details
2024-01-14 02:21:57 -0600 Rating Details