Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-18 05:32:09 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: B0835AD1F162373948E017D0E9D7EF4FD4E737E94F21718B6B5A52926CFE71D1
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 - B0835AD1F162373948E017D0E9D7EF4FD4E737E94F21718B6B5A52926CFE71D1
  • createdAtMillis - 1713418329172
  • 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 - 1
  • 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 - 1780813291683725382B0835AD1F162373948E017D0E9D7EF4FD4E737E94F21718B6B5A52926CFE71D1