Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-06-29 20:46:38 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 60D2AB8839D3EF47DD1C377DD8246EBA76ECB17DD65F13F29A2276F700AA2348
Participant Details

Original Note:

Although explicitly disallowed as a *structural consideration* by the ruling, the majority states that essays about *individual experiences* with race are okay, which creates an incredibly vague grey zone. It is arguably unclear what would(n't) specifically be allowed. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf (pg. 8)

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1674500880526110725
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 60D2AB8839D3EF47DD1C377DD8246EBA76ECB17DD65F13F29A2276F700AA2348
  • createdAtMillis - 1688071598902
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 167450088052611072560D2AB8839D3EF47DD1C377DD8246EBA76ECB17DD65F13F29A2276F700AA2348