Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2022-03-15 01:43:46 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: B9783A5EBD0CB693796838A1234CADA6F70BE1FE7EE93A071D7331EC94B59B17
Participant Details

Original Note:

The first author of the paper replied to this tweet stating that, not only is the paper an unpiublished abstract, but it also lacks enough strong evidence to determine any conclusion. https://twitter.com/aesbrah/status/1501075886539423748?s=21

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1502787233509642242
  • participantId - B9783A5EBD0CB693796838A1234CADA6F70BE1FE7EE93A071D7331EC94B59B17
  • raterParticipantId -
  • createdAtMillis - 1647308626149
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1502787233509642242B9783A5EBD0CB693796838A1234CADA6F70BE1FE7EE93A071D7331EC94B59B17