Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-03-25 23:04:58 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: B1B80D7AC63E872CFE2C7F79A89AD726E2C31B8EB4639EFF53AD356C675D57EB
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 - B1B80D7AC63E872CFE2C7F79A89AD726E2C31B8EB4639EFF53AD356C675D57EB
  • createdAtMillis - 1679785498605
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1639718758540345345B1B80D7AC63E872CFE2C7F79A89AD726E2C31B8EB4639EFF53AD356C675D57EB