Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-10 07:58:52 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 56ED47AE2DC7E66262EEDD001A04149697ACF1E804F4BDF2FC96947B26655235
Participant Details

Original Note:

A nota sugerida está incorreta. O caso do Fernando Capez era uma investigação criminal. O caso do funcionário do Twitter era por descumprimento de uma ordem de um Tribunal Eleitoral. Os 2 casos não estão relacionados. Investigação criminal: https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1775519613788336481/photo/1 Ordem Tribunal Eleitoral: https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1775519779186508088/photo/1

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1777967686271512913
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 56ED47AE2DC7E66262EEDD001A04149697ACF1E804F4BDF2FC96947B26655235
  • createdAtMillis - 1712735932851
  • 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 - 177796768627151291356ED47AE2DC7E66262EEDD001A04149697ACF1E804F4BDF2FC96947B26655235