Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-03-10 16:49:18 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 45060ED935D102E05C21C743FE433C0B17B27D8FCF69CED01A2AD3F9AB2815B1
Participant Details

Original Note:

This tweet merely proposes an ethical argument against defacing two flags representing two different ideas, not making misleading claims about the legality of flag burning or destruction on public property.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1634210841993125896
  • participantId - 45060ED935D102E05C21C743FE433C0B17B27D8FCF69CED01A2AD3F9AB2815B1
  • raterParticipantId -
  • createdAtMillis - 1678466958831
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 163421084199312589645060ED935D102E05C21C743FE433C0B17B27D8FCF69CED01A2AD3F9AB2815B1