Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-09 11:30:19 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 3DF2EE7666F2477695501351C69A985AAE47089021263E0243865028ED927A40
Participant Details

Original Note:

The referenced University of York's Systematic Review is included as an Annex to the Cass Report and can be read in full. https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/CassReview_Final.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1788525748141101492
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 3DF2EE7666F2477695501351C69A985AAE47089021263E0243865028ED927A40
  • createdAtMillis - 1715254219957
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 17885257481411014923DF2EE7666F2477695501351C69A985AAE47089021263E0243865028ED927A40