Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-02-28 08:19:29 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0055105A6EF5E4633CC52B7F34B03EF2490A906E1EE2CCD9846BC537D545975C
Participant Details

Original Note:

Die Kernpunkte des Correctiv-Berichtes sind von Vorgerau nicht bestritten worden. Erstinstanzlich sind zwei seiner drei Klagepunkte, die nur Nebenaspekte betreffen, abgewiesen worden, https://www.lto.de/recht/nachrichten/n/beschluss-lg-hamburg-324-o-61-24-vosgerau-correctiv/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1762751149457756604
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 0055105A6EF5E4633CC52B7F34B03EF2490A906E1EE2CCD9846BC537D545975C
  • createdAtMillis - 1709108369840
  • 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 - 0
  • 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 - 17627511494577566040055105A6EF5E4633CC52B7F34B03EF2490A906E1EE2CCD9846BC537D545975C