Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-05 07:45:49 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 689FF5D8C134DA2D06C6C58C287D56B7A95007DFA38609059C76A3DD08AC92FE
Participant Details

Original Note:

This alleged request from "Stewart" was not mentioned in the SCOTUS opinion because it had no bearing on the outcome of the case. The issue of the plaintiff's legal standing was not in dispute in this case, which is why the dissent doesn't mention it. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1676069505724981248
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 689FF5D8C134DA2D06C6C58C287D56B7A95007DFA38609059C76A3DD08AC92FE
  • createdAtMillis - 1688543149571
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1676069505724981248689FF5D8C134DA2D06C6C58C287D56B7A95007DFA38609059C76A3DD08AC92FE