Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-09-19 07:57:12 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: A0D644B722EC8877A33A763FE7F080C83E3CBCC10E93E9B062F6039936CAF5FF
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN, El dato aportado es real y contrastable, y es indiferente respecto al porcentaje que supone de condenas revisadas. Para extrapolar conclusiones cualitativamente distintas no incompatibles con el tuit está la sección de respuestas.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1703842300919419100
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - A0D644B722EC8877A33A763FE7F080C83E3CBCC10E93E9B062F6039936CAF5FF
  • createdAtMillis - 1695110232498
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • 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 - 0
  • ratingsId - 1703842300919419100A0D644B722EC8877A33A763FE7F080C83E3CBCC10E93E9B062F6039936CAF5FF