Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-01-06 13:51:38 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 991A209035426D51BDB39E77B9A565674F5523024F56BCB282862C3B0A1F204F
Participant Details

Original Note:

In addition to the post clearly expressing a personal opinion, it addressed the proposed note's point already. Its as if the proposed CN note author didn't actually read the post but just wants to argue a point... perfect fodder for a reply to a post.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1743408295979700354
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 991A209035426D51BDB39E77B9A565674F5523024F56BCB282862C3B0A1F204F
  • createdAtMillis - 1704549098389
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 1
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1743408295979700354991A209035426D51BDB39E77B9A565674F5523024F56BCB282862C3B0A1F204F