Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-08 21:26:50 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 350F68170C82EFEA9E6ADD83412CD78D4C78C10A541FC663D6DEE81D64CE5236
Participant Details

Original Note:

Article in question asks a different question than what SCOTUS ruled on. SCOTUS ruled on compelled speech of creative works by government and not LGBT discrimination. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf https://reason.com/volokh/2023/07/03/how-to-read-303-creative-v-elenis/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1677788534411780097
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 350F68170C82EFEA9E6ADD83412CD78D4C78C10A541FC663D6DEE81D64CE5236
  • createdAtMillis - 1688851610598
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • 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 - 1677788534411780097350F68170C82EFEA9E6ADD83412CD78D4C78C10A541FC663D6DEE81D64CE5236