Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-06-03 00:25:35 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 64B5C37B508E63D87B7FE04C24D2133D86F0719D272F5578A659A87D4D05E3DB
Participant Details

Original Note:

The claim by Honig repeated here that the possible grounds were not stated is false - the judge addressed them in February '24 and approved three and dismissed one. https://x.com/rgoodlaw/status/1797295137703211122/photo/3 https://x.com/rgoodlaw/status/1797295137703211122

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1797373468465385890
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 64B5C37B508E63D87B7FE04C24D2133D86F0719D272F5578A659A87D4D05E3DB
  • createdAtMillis - 1717374335440
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • 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 - 179737346846538589064B5C37B508E63D87B7FE04C24D2133D86F0719D272F5578A659A87D4D05E3DB