Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-09-05 05:05:44 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: C9B3CC2F9B7AEBDFA50B0BDD65142010A775515C81127BE6E6CDB36384D47DB2
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 - C9B3CC2F9B7AEBDFA50B0BDD65142010A775515C81127BE6E6CDB36384D47DB2
  • createdAtMillis - 1725512744550
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1778997570553159718C9B3CC2F9B7AEBDFA50B0BDD65142010A775515C81127BE6E6CDB36384D47DB2