Birdwatch Note
2024-07-30 10:59:16 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING
NNN even if the current version would be 60% more performant, it would gain only one place up and still be in the bottom 3.
Written by F1D0621A0D87634AF1F23F4CCEE0F5C56E54C722A1F3A50A2FD2B89CC57A20FF
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/1817608815820325015
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 - 1818239935549227040
- noteId - 1818239935549227040
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - F1D0621A0D87634AF1F23F4CCEE0F5C56E54C722A1F3A50A2FD2B89CC57A20FF Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1722337156558
- tweetId - 1817608815820325015
- 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 - 0
- summary
- NNN even if the current version would be 60% more performant, it would gain only one place up and still be in the bottom 3.
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2024-07-31 08:35:41 -0500 | Rating Details |