Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-16 12:15:50 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: E5CE6D5654B26769D3B683CFA345C062679A06EA00EF271A6A2ED992DA367AD5
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 - E5CE6D5654B26769D3B683CFA345C062679A06EA00EF271A6A2ED992DA367AD5
  • createdAtMillis - 1715861750356
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1791037229797724303E5CE6D5654B26769D3B683CFA345C062679A06EA00EF271A6A2ED992DA367AD5