Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-02-09 23:40:20 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: EC8A8811FCB041FA503C5AD2278958432B29F3549E001B36F01246922084EEFC
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN, Both of the original posters statements are factually correct. The dissenting opinion statement lacks the wherewithal to delineate between "by a court of law" and "in a court of law" and the implications of both phrases.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1756076857412186521
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - EC8A8811FCB041FA503C5AD2278958432B29F3549E001B36F01246922084EEFC
  • createdAtMillis - 1707522020933
  • 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 - 1
  • 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 - 1756076857412186521EC8A8811FCB041FA503C5AD2278958432B29F3549E001B36F01246922084EEFC