Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-04 11:37:27 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 677B86B4AF3F666A249FA87C1B31C7A5AE54D3D0E42514A7FC0321A74430E197
Participant Details

Original Note:

The alleged request from Stewart was not mentioned in the SCOTUS opinion and played no part in the outcome. The plaintiff had standing to bring the case because she established a credible threat of prosecution. The dissent did not mention standing because it was not in dispute. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1676017385281835008
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 677B86B4AF3F666A249FA87C1B31C7A5AE54D3D0E42514A7FC0321A74430E197
  • createdAtMillis - 1688470647559
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1676017385281835008677B86B4AF3F666A249FA87C1B31C7A5AE54D3D0E42514A7FC0321A74430E197