Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-22 18:13:03 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 9BCE08EF67F5C63FF08CAF26E59303927A83E0FAE7F8C1A7991C9FAEC28E813E
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 - 9BCE08EF67F5C63FF08CAF26E59303927A83E0FAE7F8C1A7991C9FAEC28E813E
  • createdAtMillis - 1716401583082
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • 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 - 17932056236449055479BCE08EF67F5C63FF08CAF26E59303927A83E0FAE7F8C1A7991C9FAEC28E813E