Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-03 04:52:53 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 00FD81F01347477D326A07F546518AD2C66D0D5F218CA93E16F5CF5D3496A6BA
Participant Details

Original Note:

Not only did the International Court of Justice offer only advice here, experts note that the court does not recognise its own decisions as binding precedent. See Oxford Journal of International Dispute Settlement, Vol. 2, No. 1 (2011), page 12. https://academic.oup.com/jids/article/2/1/5/843965

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1819522845829222657
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 00FD81F01347477D326A07F546518AD2C66D0D5F218CA93E16F5CF5D3496A6BA
  • createdAtMillis - 1722660773496
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 181952284582922265700FD81F01347477D326A07F546518AD2C66D0D5F218CA93E16F5CF5D3496A6BA