Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-06-21 08:38:09 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: C26CECE0D6D2535A6AF1CFF9DBCF9FD43FD8C9DF6EBED3E4A1A961E4E8A45D1F
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 - C26CECE0D6D2535A6AF1CFF9DBCF9FD43FD8C9DF6EBED3E4A1A961E4E8A45D1F
  • createdAtMillis - 1687336689649
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • 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 - 0
  • ratingsId - 1671232349684547585C26CECE0D6D2535A6AF1CFF9DBCF9FD43FD8C9DF6EBED3E4A1A961E4E8A45D1F