Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-18 15:10:21 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 4B5B803E9E6ADECE433EF4606458E44EE8A8223037C696F0C89FE429CB610BE2
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN as the post expresses an opinion, but also the proposed note misses the key point made. The judgement in the Lehrmann case is made only on the evidence put forward by the parties to it and accepted into evidence, subject to any conditions requested and accepted.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1780813291683725382
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 4B5B803E9E6ADECE433EF4606458E44EE8A8223037C696F0C89FE429CB610BE2
  • createdAtMillis - 1713453021412
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 17808132916837253824B5B803E9E6ADECE433EF4606458E44EE8A8223037C696F0C89FE429CB610BE2