Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-22 17:55:32 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: E963FA4E065F54D4CB032EFD88C3A8F09B97F7274F8A710B84B586356B49CFF4
Participant Details

Original Note:

The original post by @DramaAlert is factually wrong. Infact, Supreme Court has held back High Court order. Culprit claimed that he inadvertently watched child Prn. Child Prs remains illegal in India under Section 14 of the POCSO Act. 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 - 1782467824851591231
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - E963FA4E065F54D4CB032EFD88C3A8F09B97F7274F8A710B84B586356B49CFF4
  • createdAtMillis - 1713808532920
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • 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 - 1782467824851591231E963FA4E065F54D4CB032EFD88C3A8F09B97F7274F8A710B84B586356B49CFF4