Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-12-19 23:15:45 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 837747B6C183A80B36793329A1C4AE8206D8A9F1EEAF20C8B7A2B595A86B93AD
Participant Details

Original Note:

Si ce texte n'avait pas besoin des votes du RN pour passer (sans leurs votes, il serait passé à 261 votes Pour contre 186 votes Contre) il fallait néanmoins que le RN ne s'y oppose pas Si le RN avait voté contre ce texte, il aurait été rejeté à 274 voix Contre contre 261 Pour https://www2.assemblee-nationale.fr/scrutins/detail/(legislature)/16/(num)/3213

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1737243926447132719
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 837747B6C183A80B36793329A1C4AE8206D8A9F1EEAF20C8B7A2B595A86B93AD
createdAtMillis - 1703027745116
version - 2
agree - 0
disagree - 0
helpful - 0
notHelpful - 0
helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
helpfulOther - 0
helpfulInformative - 0
helpfulClear - 0
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 - 1
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
ratingsId - 1737243926447132719837747B6C183A80B36793329A1C4AE8206D8A9F1EEAF20C8B7A2B595A86B93AD