Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-03 12:15:44 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: DAAC55D6639DBF1E5FFBF9864095C757C27D3CCB0C2EAB007D493C3C253F2BC5
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 - DAAC55D6639DBF1E5FFBF9864095C757C27D3CCB0C2EAB007D493C3C253F2BC5
  • createdAtMillis - 1722687344903
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 1819522845829222657DAAC55D6639DBF1E5FFBF9864095C757C27D3CCB0C2EAB007D493C3C253F2BC5