Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-03-26 16:12:02 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 4635C8DFC2B0A1B52D905DB7B82CC9E58014353AD9820D6BA2D8235EC36AF538
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 - 4635C8DFC2B0A1B52D905DB7B82CC9E58014353AD9820D6BA2D8235EC36AF538
  • createdAtMillis - 1679847122570
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 16397187585403453454635C8DFC2B0A1B52D905DB7B82CC9E58014353AD9820D6BA2D8235EC36AF538