Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-01-19 07:53:47 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: D30C8D7E429428A8C52B8B90435DAABAE939094BE8EC73EE393B17D3869B286A
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 - D30C8D7E429428A8C52B8B90435DAABAE939094BE8EC73EE393B17D3869B286A
  • createdAtMillis - 1705650827374
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1748209009566568632D30C8D7E429428A8C52B8B90435DAABAE939094BE8EC73EE393B17D3869B286A