Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-26 12:00:16 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 4BCC5BBEEAE55D9609F0CAF25CB4E52544E1F8E271B5D497550D3BD6FD9FDC44
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 - 4BCC5BBEEAE55D9609F0CAF25CB4E52544E1F8E271B5D497550D3BD6FD9FDC44
  • createdAtMillis - 1716724816719
  • 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 - 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 - 17946977974275075454BCC5BBEEAE55D9609F0CAF25CB4E52544E1F8E271B5D497550D3BD6FD9FDC44