Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-03-21 16:01:02 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 6779E0AAD43619714067981E6F9DF2B436D141CED221F34FB770523E966D0259
Participant Details

Original Note:

At the time this tweet was written, there was no prohibition against naming anonymous users. X staff have been pretending that the rule was always there but it is clearly absent from all archived copies of the site, even the one taken hours after this tweet. https://web.archive.org/web/20240320090939/https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-information

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1770826272064614496
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 6779E0AAD43619714067981E6F9DF2B436D141CED221F34FB770523E966D0259
createdAtMillis - 1711036862122
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 - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
notHelpfulOutdated - 0
notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
ratingsId - 17708262720646144966779E0AAD43619714067981E6F9DF2B436D141CED221F34FB770523E966D0259