Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-07-02 17:49:20 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 39F62F1073CCEF1D2810B09405AA2B7CEC58B2F0D4E5B84EF34E4EDC2BE50D26
Participant Details

Original Note:

The original post is the author's opinion of the results of the ruling. Although we used to only have the steps in the note above to change it, what SCOTUS essentially did was change the constitution by judicial fiat and thus "greatly increasing presidential power in perpetuity".

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1808179692878680473
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 39F62F1073CCEF1D2810B09405AA2B7CEC58B2F0D4E5B84EF34E4EDC2BE50D26
  • createdAtMillis - 1719942560730
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 180817969287868047339F62F1073CCEF1D2810B09405AA2B7CEC58B2F0D4E5B84EF34E4EDC2BE50D26