Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-08-25 21:44:07 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 384A2E624CE0219266149A0B4C91908284346183E02967D1F1D4D74314458D64
Participant Details

Original Note:

The court refused Mr Fox's appeal that the original judge was wrong in declining to define the meaning of “racist”; ruling the decision entirely legitimate. NO definition of "racist" was given by either judge. Mr Fox's claims here are therefore innacurate. Para 42 & 56 👇🏻 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2023/1000

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1695163848443953293
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 384A2E624CE0219266149A0B4C91908284346183E02967D1F1D4D74314458D64
  • createdAtMillis - 1692999847136
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 1695163848443953293384A2E624CE0219266149A0B4C91908284346183E02967D1F1D4D74314458D64