Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-17 02:17:06 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 25D06C3B2F1D846246A54C90B36FEFE4BFB65DF4B773D673DB34BA721A68D65A
Participant Details

Original Note:

A review of the piece in question confirms that the authors gender was never mentioned. The bad review stemmed from quality, not gender. The words of Dominic Sandbruck themselves confirm the review would have been better if, quite simply, the book was better. https://twitter.com/dcsandbrook/status/1791028557793120611?t=D75rhsn_o5pJbaMhDRmvkA&s=19

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1791037229797724303
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 25D06C3B2F1D846246A54C90B36FEFE4BFB65DF4B773D673DB34BA721A68D65A
  • createdAtMillis - 1715912226042
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 179103722979772430325D06C3B2F1D846246A54C90B36FEFE4BFB65DF4B773D673DB34BA721A68D65A