Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-03-07 11:25:46 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 7C73A8160DB75C86C9411ED7F7F37E64E6A236AB038CA4BB3E40248CB83BC678
Participant Details

Original Note:

While the Forstater ruling did judge gender critical views to be protected, it specifically stated that it did "not mean that those with gender-critical beliefs can misgender trans persons with impunity" and that trans people still have protection from harassment. (see page 4) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60c1cce1d3bf7f4bd9814e39/Maya_Forstater_v_CGD_Europe_and_others_UKEAT0105_20_JOJ.pdf#page55

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1765596469736640873
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 7C73A8160DB75C86C9411ED7F7F37E64E6A236AB038CA4BB3E40248CB83BC678
createdAtMillis - 1709810746109
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 - 0
notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
ratingsId - 17655964697366408737C73A8160DB75C86C9411ED7F7F37E64E6A236AB038CA4BB3E40248CB83BC678