Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-10 12:34:12 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 66B0E631E4A39B15148B3792366E67D797A5EE7AFAA039E4FCD99C58620588B4
Participant Details

Original Note:

The case was not ruled upon as it dismissed due to the lack of legal standing by the appellant. The judges however did comment and reported they were divided on the issue of the case (LGB Alliance’s charity status). The case may be brought back by someone with legal standing. https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Mermaids-v-Charity-Commission-judgment-060723.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1678352203180916736
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 66B0E631E4A39B15148B3792366E67D797A5EE7AFAA039E4FCD99C58620588B4
  • createdAtMillis - 1688992452428
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • 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 - 167835220318091673666B0E631E4A39B15148B3792366E67D797A5EE7AFAA039E4FCD99C58620588B4