Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-22 19:10:52 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 90D6146474C6CBF2C7AE5D2AA69E34B0F8097AD7A591FBB661BD91B95D05CD21
Participant Details

Original Note:

The tribunal in Adams v ERCC heard evidence from the centre’s employees that they did not receive threats or need to lock down. They also heard ERCC prioritised the CEO’s wishes over rape survivors’, turned away those who did not conform & refused to refer to other services. https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/adams-vs-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre?r=1gxdhb&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1793205623644905547
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 90D6146474C6CBF2C7AE5D2AA69E34B0F8097AD7A591FBB661BD91B95D05CD21
  • createdAtMillis - 1716405052706
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 179320562364490554790D6146474C6CBF2C7AE5D2AA69E34B0F8097AD7A591FBB661BD91B95D05CD21