Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-03-26 11:26:58 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1E63C4F17963B9C5B4489BFDF29FE99946F4AFDBE9F44C5F9A9F6119EB7A78A4
Participant Details

Original Note:

The tweet is expressing an opinion. The full context may sway public opinion, but a court of law determines what evidence is admissible based on specific charges that are brought. The prior harassment may be totally irrelevant based on self defense laws in this jurisdiction.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1639718758540345345
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 1E63C4F17963B9C5B4489BFDF29FE99946F4AFDBE9F44C5F9A9F6119EB7A78A4
  • createdAtMillis - 1679830018160
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 16397187585403453451E63C4F17963B9C5B4489BFDF29FE99946F4AFDBE9F44C5F9A9F6119EB7A78A4