Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-06-22 06:14:32 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: B0F22003D157133EE982BC5803B4EB1C2F1D59C8A3D3DD9592EBA459776FF77D
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 - B0F22003D157133EE982BC5803B4EB1C2F1D59C8A3D3DD9592EBA459776FF77D
  • createdAtMillis - 1687414472228
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 1
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 1671232349684547585B0F22003D157133EE982BC5803B4EB1C2F1D59C8A3D3DD9592EBA459776FF77D