Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-01-14 16:06:08 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0F5A844BC5D5586511ED7AA30594B4FA003E135272B13F85D1CCB876EA5F182D
Participant Details

Original Note:

No note needed. The current note uses an article as a source which says she won her case and was cleared. The original post already acknowledged she had to face two medical boards – the current note is just repeating this which gives the false impression her post is misleading.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1746298883506852305
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 0F5A844BC5D5586511ED7AA30594B4FA003E135272B13F85D1CCB876EA5F182D
  • createdAtMillis - 1705248368034
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 17462988835068523050F5A844BC5D5586511ED7AA30594B4FA003E135272B13F85D1CCB876EA5F182D