Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-01-23 19:03:44 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: F8B3437C05230F2A92F393522497465498F4167B23FD37E65057CF33F28445A0
Participant Details

Original Note:

Per US Supreme Court, there's no hate speech exception to the free speech rights¹, thus you can't simultaneously protect free speech and tackle hate speech, thus the mandate is self-contradictory, thus the claim that it's clear is false. ¹https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_in_the_United_States#:~:text=In%20a%20Supreme%20Court%20case%20on%20the%20issue%2C%20Matal%20v.%20Tam%20(2017)%2C%20the%20justices%20unanimously%20reaffirmed%20that%20there%20is%20effectively%20no%20%22hate%20speech%22%20exception%20to%20the%20free%20speech%20rights%20protected%20by%20the%20First%20Amendment

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1749847323708883060
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - F8B3437C05230F2A92F393522497465498F4167B23FD37E65057CF33F28445A0
  • createdAtMillis - 1706036624620
  • 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 - 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 - 1749847323708883060F8B3437C05230F2A92F393522497465498F4167B23FD37E65057CF33F28445A0