Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-18 18:33:24 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 05A137AD0F9F1B8BB01CCE1AFC6B4B1D70F2B8FA5B39B8A5E8B3F55E5DDF5D4C
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN. The post does not claim the pardon was proof of innocence. There is plenty of evidence towards his innocence and consensus among historians to support the post’s assertion. The case for Frank’s guilt can be argued outside of CN.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1824837800879075678
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 05A137AD0F9F1B8BB01CCE1AFC6B4B1D70F2B8FA5B39B8A5E8B3F55E5DDF5D4C
  • createdAtMillis - 1724006004203
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 182483780087907567805A137AD0F9F1B8BB01CCE1AFC6B4B1D70F2B8FA5B39B8A5E8B3F55E5DDF5D4C