Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-11-17 11:03:02 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: A77EB65DA513238E58D64F25B3CD71D5B6B841437BA6AD72AEB87595507C2A2A
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 - A77EB65DA513238E58D64F25B3CD71D5B6B841437BA6AD72AEB87595507C2A2A
createdAtMillis - 1700218982733
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 - 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 - 1725449011786612896A77EB65DA513238E58D64F25B3CD71D5B6B841437BA6AD72AEB87595507C2A2A