Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note

2024-10-28 03:48:56 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING

It states no facts. The CN complaining about the watermark as an "ad" is specious and if needed, the proper thing to do is to report the tweet using the existing "Report" functionality. This is an abuse of @CommunityNotes

Written by 05E13986BEEE737F8D11F7258DBBAF77E03CCAFAAC0A754FC744BF34B8B8EB7C
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/1850575552593215905

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 - 1850746547421540696
  • noteId - 1850746547421540696
  • participantId -
  • noteAuthorParticipantId - 05E13986BEEE737F8D11F7258DBBAF77E03CCAFAAC0A754FC744BF34B8B8EB7C Participant Details
  • createdAtMillis - 1730087336771
  • tweetId - 1850575552593215905
  • classification - NOT_MISLEADING
  • believable -
  • harmful -
  • validationDifficulty -
  • misleadingOther - 0
  • misleadingFactualError - 0
  • misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
  • misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
  • misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
  • misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
  • misleadingSatire - 0
  • notMisleadingOther - 1
  • notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
  • notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
  • notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
  • notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
  • trustworthySources - 0
  • summary
    • It states no facts. The CN complaining about the watermark as an "ad" is specious and if needed, the proper thing to do is to report the tweet using the existing "Report" functionality. This is an abuse of @CommunityNotes