Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-04-09 21:57:19 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: B2964AAB3B8C8CA5D682E8B2107FDCF4F2F39FADBE6C4CED4A9FA136B79ACA93
Participant Details

Original Note:

Re: proposed note saying "misleading"--own source contradicts note, points out that the previous administration *was*, in fact, directly ignoring a SCOTUS ruling in its actions. Not a mere processing delay. No note necessary.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1645130292783349765
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - B2964AAB3B8C8CA5D682E8B2107FDCF4F2F39FADBE6C4CED4A9FA136B79ACA93
  • createdAtMillis - 1681077439400
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1645130292783349765B2964AAB3B8C8CA5D682E8B2107FDCF4F2F39FADBE6C4CED4A9FA136B79ACA93