Birdwatch Note
2025-01-03 22:48:36 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING
NNN - the error of asteroid vs comet are not highly consequential and not worth CN. It can be taken to replies. - Arguing against the "clearest image ever" claim is nitpicking since "clearest" is not an objective metric. It's a valid opinion.
Written by 7CA7E82F8CE6E0002FFDAD111786CD7157B2DE79DC3CCD149995EEF1FD1BB692
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/1875000148885135693
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 - 1875313337925308542
- noteId - 1875313337925308542
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 7CA7E82F8CE6E0002FFDAD111786CD7157B2DE79DC3CCD149995EEF1FD1BB692 Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1735944516055
- tweetId - 1875000148885135693
- 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
- NNN - the error of asteroid vs comet are not highly consequential and not worth CN. It can be taken to replies. - Arguing against the "clearest image ever" claim is nitpicking since "clearest" is not an objective metric. It's a valid opinion.
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2025-01-04 08:47:56 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-04 11:42:14 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-04 08:46:07 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-04 01:14:27 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-03 23:03:55 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-03 20:19:10 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-03 20:03:45 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-04 05:22:58 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-03 19:42:00 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-03 18:36:59 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2025-01-03 18:16:07 -0600 | Rating Details |