Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-08-04 07:01:52 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 503B057A13D7328055F38AD0EEE878EC3B650203FA552B0D613D2615C3F5D133
Participant Details

Original Note:

Tweet is misleading. It lumps anyone who doesn't agree with the science (undefined) as "anti-science". In science, being skeptical does not mean doubting the validity of everything, nor does it mean being cynical. A person can be skeptical without being "anti-science". https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/11/the-republican-party-isnt-really-the-anti-science-party/281219/ https://cbc-network.org/2012/04/skepticism-over-politicized-science-is-not-anti-science/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1687258800125083648
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 503B057A13D7328055F38AD0EEE878EC3B650203FA552B0D613D2615C3F5D133
createdAtMillis - 1691132512460
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 - 1
notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
notHelpfulOutdated - 0
notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
ratingsId - 1687258800125083648503B057A13D7328055F38AD0EEE878EC3B650203FA552B0D613D2615C3F5D133