Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-20 20:11:39 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 47427FB50480500610E5402A72AEFB4CF1D64E0080688579BE983D05D869EFEF
Participant Details

Original Note:

Adam Bienkov has made a false comparison between the two cases. In the "gay cake" case, the appellants successfully argued that they should not be compelled to write a message on the cake that they objected to. This does not apply to banking. No compelled expression applies. https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0020-judgment.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1681993122291544064
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 47427FB50480500610E5402A72AEFB4CF1D64E0080688579BE983D05D869EFEF
  • createdAtMillis - 1689883899039
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • 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 - 1
  • ratingsId - 168199312229154406447427FB50480500610E5402A72AEFB4CF1D64E0080688579BE983D05D869EFEF