Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-02-17 05:11:10 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 97BE2601191A998ECC8F5D3D64CCF3817A2C092BEAF64A7793F3D598C4BB791E
Participant Details

Original Note:

regardless of the inaccuracies of the book, the tweet itself doesn't seem to offer misleading information. is important to understand that the scope of CN as a tool is pretty narrow. it's not supposed to guide conversation.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1758576181551501323
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 97BE2601191A998ECC8F5D3D64CCF3817A2C092BEAF64A7793F3D598C4BB791E
  • createdAtMillis - 1708146670783
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 175857618155150132397BE2601191A998ECC8F5D3D64CCF3817A2C092BEAF64A7793F3D598C4BB791E