Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-21 17:09:56 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: CCBB9A1EFFF6123DF40CFD8ABAAA3DD5E3CEB91BF40BD5CAFFD5E641AF99697E
Participant Details

Original Note:

This is taken out of context, as this is not a blanket law but instead just an excerpt from the below mentioned article. even though the verdict is still awful, this post tries to portray it as something it's not. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/screserves-verdict-on-madras-hc-s-child-pornography-order-101713601280456.html

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1782086779056824470
participantId -
raterParticipantId - CCBB9A1EFFF6123DF40CFD8ABAAA3DD5E3CEB91BF40BD5CAFFD5E641AF99697E
createdAtMillis - 1713719396879
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 - 1
notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
notHelpfulOutdated - 0
notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
ratingsId - 1782086779056824470CCBB9A1EFFF6123DF40CFD8ABAAA3DD5E3CEB91BF40BD5CAFFD5E641AF99697E