Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-11-20 16:20:04 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 914F3B806235053352E439E90582FA7BC5396B823BBFF4675D426027E86C9495
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 - 914F3B806235053352E439E90582FA7BC5396B823BBFF4675D426027E86C9495
createdAtMillis - 1700497204440
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 - 1725449011786612896914F3B806235053352E439E90582FA7BC5396B823BBFF4675D426027E86C9495