Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-10-27 11:01:34 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: CCC082A65E29B92A2476BD5D0A52F91ECCB5A46C218155DB227DA524D6159393
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 - CCC082A65E29B92A2476BD5D0A52F91ECCB5A46C218155DB227DA524D6159393
  • createdAtMillis - 1698404494199
  • 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 - 1717364807727514065CCC082A65E29B92A2476BD5D0A52F91ECCB5A46C218155DB227DA524D6159393