Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-06-27 19:21:39 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 72E8E3BDB6D03F6CFC72C938AA1591E9EAD5F7EF9B2AD58BCA98B9A1CA7C0A57
Participant Details

Original Note:

This is a case where the individual making the statement is an expert in the field and, just like an expert witness testifying in a court of law, their subject matter expertise makes their testimony admissible as fact. He is an expert. The necessary source is the tweet itself.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1673673074430935041
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 72E8E3BDB6D03F6CFC72C938AA1591E9EAD5F7EF9B2AD58BCA98B9A1CA7C0A57
  • createdAtMillis - 1687893699902
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 167367307443093504172E8E3BDB6D03F6CFC72C938AA1591E9EAD5F7EF9B2AD58BCA98B9A1CA7C0A57