Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-03-23 18:42:29 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 3EC01FB0C37685A98E8C01107374C94AE2F9385CDF27B64D3BA9A45E071D9387
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 - 3EC01FB0C37685A98E8C01107374C94AE2F9385CDF27B64D3BA9A45E071D9387
  • createdAtMillis - 1711219349846
  • 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 - 0
  • 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 - 17715809416405811913EC01FB0C37685A98E8C01107374C94AE2F9385CDF27B64D3BA9A45E071D9387