Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-10-26 06:44:59 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: A121A031F89EEAB132CB5F293E998C481846B2F08B6864CE3BA84F26E6EF2BCB
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 - A121A031F89EEAB132CB5F293E998C481846B2F08B6864CE3BA84F26E6EF2BCB
  • createdAtMillis - 1698302699276
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1717364807727514065A121A031F89EEAB132CB5F293E998C481846B2F08B6864CE3BA84F26E6EF2BCB