Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-03 13:14:53 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 9C0D514E405C74FAE244864CB7D6359E16ACBBD7474896A4CD83D1CEF298FD5D
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 - 9C0D514E405C74FAE244864CB7D6359E16ACBBD7474896A4CD83D1CEF298FD5D
  • createdAtMillis - 1722690893414
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 18195228458292226579C0D514E405C74FAE244864CB7D6359E16ACBBD7474896A4CD83D1CEF298FD5D