Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-06-19 05:20:00 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 858A4E55F3434B8959BDDD21D9359622920A3A7917D4ED17CBA3CF42E137FDA1
Participant Details

Original Note:

They claim they paid £144k for the company to carry out the vetting. No evidence gave against that. It's an assumption to say this didn't occur and that the only service they could have possibly have had was to vet people themselves on the platform. Other tweets are not a source.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1803099852781330867
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 858A4E55F3434B8959BDDD21D9359622920A3A7917D4ED17CBA3CF42E137FDA1
  • createdAtMillis - 1718774400149
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1803099852781330867858A4E55F3434B8959BDDD21D9359622920A3A7917D4ED17CBA3CF42E137FDA1