Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-17 22:43:21 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 8060E1B4A3BDCBFCCA7261E781D0CB17E9A2974C2FACC7CADDCB0F804F663B4A
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 - 8060E1B4A3BDCBFCCA7261E781D0CB17E9A2974C2FACC7CADDCB0F804F663B4A
  • createdAtMillis - 1723934601620
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 18248378008790756788060E1B4A3BDCBFCCA7261E781D0CB17E9A2974C2FACC7CADDCB0F804F663B4A