Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-10-30 23:51:37 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 51EACA682C9D730486E05B982E15E8DE0D0C7E19AEA3D1F8F60716B75B0E2C3D
Participant Details

Original Note:

The proposed note cites sources stating that the recounts produced the same results as the original count. This is not disputed. The issue, which the tweet provides verified .gov evidence for, is that many of the ballots originally counted and recounted were forgeries.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1717364807727514065
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 51EACA682C9D730486E05B982E15E8DE0D0C7E19AEA3D1F8F60716B75B0E2C3D
  • createdAtMillis - 1698709897348
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • 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 - 171736480772751406551EACA682C9D730486E05B982E15E8DE0D0C7E19AEA3D1F8F60716B75B0E2C3D