Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-06-20 19:11:12 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 8668C1F63E7BF6D91D0BFADB6E065E808B16DDEB81694A75EEB4A6A086ECC4A0
Participant Details

Original Note:

The OP's continued promotion of the very insular world of peer review for publication is not the reflective of the tools used for scientific discussion. Even Nature points out and encourages at some level, other mechanisms for scientific discussion. https://www.nature.com/nature-portfolio/editorial-policies/peer-review#general-information

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1671232349684547585
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 8668C1F63E7BF6D91D0BFADB6E065E808B16DDEB81694A75EEB4A6A086ECC4A0
  • createdAtMillis - 1687288272690
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 16712323496845475858668C1F63E7BF6D91D0BFADB6E065E808B16DDEB81694A75EEB4A6A086ECC4A0