Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-11-18 06:41:48 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 7F52DC1CD03732831C0C88E341B2F76FB5C6B3907EB6F5451A15755ADEB70E52
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 - 7F52DC1CD03732831C0C88E341B2F76FB5C6B3907EB6F5451A15755ADEB70E52
createdAtMillis - 1700289708292
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 - 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 - 17254490117866128967F52DC1CD03732831C0C88E341B2F76FB5C6B3907EB6F5451A15755ADEB70E52