Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-11 07:29:45 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 6DE8D80A57090560303A435318CB923E5F44C22CB5B0C25911E05FC74DFBCEE7
Participant Details

Original Note:

Post is personal opinion referring to the lack of citations for claims, flawed methodology used to discredit studies and bias in language used. It is not claiming that the entire review is fiction, but that it is highly flawed which is a valid opinion and not worthy of a note.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1778245111937487232
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 6DE8D80A57090560303A435318CB923E5F44C22CB5B0C25911E05FC74DFBCEE7
  • createdAtMillis - 1712820585380
  • 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 - 17782451119374872326DE8D80A57090560303A435318CB923E5F44C22CB5B0C25911E05FC74DFBCEE7