Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-03 08:11:23 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 29CAF91E3EE566A68B152D91C4F01BEC5F65B1C87F010CAC75DB5037DE03D1D5
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 - 29CAF91E3EE566A68B152D91C4F01BEC5F65B1C87F010CAC75DB5037DE03D1D5
  • createdAtMillis - 1722672683168
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 181952284582922265729CAF91E3EE566A68B152D91C4F01BEC5F65B1C87F010CAC75DB5037DE03D1D5