Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-13 07:57:21 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0B51BED52BCF6A77FEC3070D2AF7B19DA1C30060029241FB3A375ACD522871DD
Participant Details

Original Note:

Note must clarify the relationship between the source given and the Cass Review, as it is not one of the systematic reviews listed on page 47 of the Cass Review (which is likely the list referred to by the OP). Until this is clear the source does not support the note. https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1778997570553159718
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 0B51BED52BCF6A77FEC3070D2AF7B19DA1C30060029241FB3A375ACD522871DD
  • createdAtMillis - 1712995041142
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 17789975705531597180B51BED52BCF6A77FEC3070D2AF7B19DA1C30060029241FB3A375ACD522871DD