Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-03-23 19:17:11 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 3431B6A7A492D93D8B66FCBB83E3E78211B4D1567E12326D03A0F0EC566701FE
Participant Details

Original Note:

The note doesn’t actually contradict the post. Yes, there are specific circumstances where a barrister is *not* required to take on the case. The original post is about rejecting a case “because the client is unpopular”, and is factually accurate.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1771580941640581191
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 3431B6A7A492D93D8B66FCBB83E3E78211B4D1567E12326D03A0F0EC566701FE
  • createdAtMillis - 1711221431580
  • 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 - 17715809416405811913431B6A7A492D93D8B66FCBB83E3E78211B4D1567E12326D03A0F0EC566701FE