Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-27 00:49:43 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1EB1AED62C5500C57EB69CA062EB18A9BD86A9FE57C3956BD0EE57F2A17FF10C
Participant Details

Original Note:

This was a result of a clerical reporting error from the county, and did not reflect the actual count of the ballots. This has been widely reported on, and is not an example of vote fraud. https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN27L2RF/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1794697797427507545
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 1EB1AED62C5500C57EB69CA062EB18A9BD86A9FE57C3956BD0EE57F2A17FF10C
  • createdAtMillis - 1716770983088
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 17946977974275075451EB1AED62C5500C57EB69CA062EB18A9BD86A9FE57C3956BD0EE57F2A17FF10C