Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-01-19 10:20:39 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 9F6750DFC8DCCF900B67C8F26A51576888DE886BE94EA45FBF6C8D6DAD096CBC
Participant Details

Original Note:

No note needed for this post. It is a genuine topic of political discourse as to whether the way judges (judicial branch) and public servants (employees in the executive branch) have interpreted the Treaty of Waitangi, including in how the Waitangi Tribunal approaches claims.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1748209009566568632
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 9F6750DFC8DCCF900B67C8F26A51576888DE886BE94EA45FBF6C8D6DAD096CBC
  • createdAtMillis - 1705659639731
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • 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 - 17482090095665686329F6750DFC8DCCF900B67C8F26A51576888DE886BE94EA45FBF6C8D6DAD096CBC