Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-15 07:03:44 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: F5F42A09006E51C0FBAEBFCA42A1B3A2325C6420CC0EA6FEF03748C22FC263B0
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN - Added context must be neutral and factual. Views on history and someone's profession are not neutral. Implying that the law and the scope given to it by the judges in this trial are self-evident or that they have no bearing on free speech is not factual but an opinion.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1790538459083424224
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - F5F42A09006E51C0FBAEBFCA42A1B3A2325C6420CC0EA6FEF03748C22FC263B0
  • createdAtMillis - 1715756624245
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1790538459083424224F5F42A09006E51C0FBAEBFCA42A1B3A2325C6420CC0EA6FEF03748C22FC263B0