Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-03-27 03:25:27 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: D520FC60050B43B0A9365D79C68EA6641AD5E501DCBE9E5E511496B9C47E269C
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 - D520FC60050B43B0A9365D79C68EA6641AD5E501DCBE9E5E511496B9C47E269C
  • createdAtMillis - 1679887527629
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1639718758540345345D520FC60050B43B0A9365D79C68EA6641AD5E501DCBE9E5E511496B9C47E269C