Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-03-26 16:40:35 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: B9753C3AFE857F60EF3CC2F7A2BD3F2F58F2DBB829FFE842634D5CD2B06C8588
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 - B9753C3AFE857F60EF3CC2F7A2BD3F2F58F2DBB829FFE842634D5CD2B06C8588
  • createdAtMillis - 1679848835992
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1639718758540345345B9753C3AFE857F60EF3CC2F7A2BD3F2F58F2DBB829FFE842634D5CD2B06C8588