Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-06 12:11:37 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 98958898A56F7559C5A8BFA8812756B014D529F2143616030E94920D41F76E3D
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN l. The appeal failed. The judgment can be found here which makes clear there was no need to rule on charitable status and to not dwell on hypotheticals https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Mermaids-v-Charity-Commission-judgment-060723.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1676925516211789828
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 98958898A56F7559C5A8BFA8812756B014D529F2143616030E94920D41F76E3D
  • createdAtMillis - 1688645497391
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 167692551621178982898958898A56F7559C5A8BFA8812756B014D529F2143616030E94920D41F76E3D