Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-02 00:35:53 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1929613D55BB40AD11C7503FA6DA298D4605E30F1B2D21869976BE287BEB44BD
Participant Details

Original Note:

Tweet expresses an opinion on factually correct claims. The case was based on whether or not a business owner, based on her personal beliefs, could refuse to provide services “celebrating marriages she does not endorse.” SCOTUS ruled she could. Note not needed. https://www.cpr.org/2023/06/30/supreme-court-303-creative-case-lgbtq/ https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1675176417141874688
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 1929613D55BB40AD11C7503FA6DA298D4605E30F1B2D21869976BE287BEB44BD
  • createdAtMillis - 1688258153858
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 1
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 1
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 16751764171418746881929613D55BB40AD11C7503FA6DA298D4605E30F1B2D21869976BE287BEB44BD