Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-08-29 19:37:38 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 7E01DBC08428DD146850F48E0EFE7756EF5FF23805F9C968ED8EC61FF61A2CF8
Participant Details

Original Note:

From the Discussion section of the Nature article used as evidence (linked above). "Our analyses should not be interpreted as an assessment of severity of a second infection versus that of a first infection"

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1696556070330859755
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 7E01DBC08428DD146850F48E0EFE7756EF5FF23805F9C968ED8EC61FF61A2CF8
  • createdAtMillis - 1693337858012
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 16965560703308597557E01DBC08428DD146850F48E0EFE7756EF5FF23805F9C968ED8EC61FF61A2CF8