Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-12-23 22:47:31 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0960071269692BB513002E3E8E67AD6FBFEB13ADFCE140EEDC5D5A8121AF2875
Participant Details

Original Note:

The tweet and headline are misleading as to the court’s ruling. The court merely denied X’s motion to dismiss, meaning that the employees stated a viable claim that may proceed to discovery. The court did not rule that X violated contracts. https://legal.thomsonreuters.com/blog/12b6-failure-to-state-a-claim/ https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/schobinger-v-twitter-order.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1738677303121453451
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 0960071269692BB513002E3E8E67AD6FBFEB13ADFCE140EEDC5D5A8121AF2875
  • createdAtMillis - 1703371651118
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • 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 - 17386773031214534510960071269692BB513002E3E8E67AD6FBFEB13ADFCE140EEDC5D5A8121AF2875