Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-11-17 15:09:56 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1888E72F729D78D29F2B05E9C5ADA0C3B5069FF1DA1AFDD2764E540FB804E980
Participant Details

Original Note:

Il fallait une majorité de votes "contre" pour refuser le prolongement. Si ceux qui se sont abstenus avaient voté "contre", la prolongation du glyphosate pour 10 ans aurait été rejetée. Ainsi, il est incorrect de prétendre qu'une abstention vaut vote "contre". https://www.francebleu.fr/infos/environnement/ue-scandaleux-erreur-monumentale-les-reactions-apres-le-renouvellement-de-l-autorisation-du-glyphosate-2985965

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1725449011786612896
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 1888E72F729D78D29F2B05E9C5ADA0C3B5069FF1DA1AFDD2764E540FB804E980
createdAtMillis - 1700233796693
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 - 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 - 17254490117866128961888E72F729D78D29F2B05E9C5ADA0C3B5069FF1DA1AFDD2764E540FB804E980