Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-10-26 02:19:35 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: AFDFD19A3FFF62C1D7E9F3E81C5CC8DE02FB05FA191C5E11AA22EA5C44153E89
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 - AFDFD19A3FFF62C1D7E9F3E81C5CC8DE02FB05FA191C5E11AA22EA5C44153E89
  • createdAtMillis - 1698286775603
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • 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 - 1717364807727514065AFDFD19A3FFF62C1D7E9F3E81C5CC8DE02FB05FA191C5E11AA22EA5C44153E89