Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-08-06 08:14:06 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 85DABADDF8A7AB76E494EF62DB1C364CC77333FF3552C0DEB5A4EC1725896D9C
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 - 85DABADDF8A7AB76E494EF62DB1C364CC77333FF3552C0DEB5A4EC1725896D9C
  • createdAtMillis - 1691309646748
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 167835220318091673685DABADDF8A7AB76E494EF62DB1C364CC77333FF3552C0DEB5A4EC1725896D9C