Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-09-27 17:18:43 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 2AE5566123DC636E6EC48AFC0272DF3AD9CD7A88EB64B2C2953F5EAA16380145
Participant Details

Original Note:

L'étude citée comporte de nombreuses failles méthodologiques. Notamment, le choix des question est biaisé et la formulation de celles-ci n'est pas toujours très claire: https://www.les-crises.fr/analyse-du-sondage-etes-vous-un-con-de-conspiracy-watch/ https://www.champeau.info/blog/2019/02/06/le-complotisme-cest-les-autres/ https://menace-theoriste.fr/mauvais-sondage-croyances-complotistes/ https://www.observatoire-des-sondages.org/complotisme-vs-charlatanisme

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1839661881230811336
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 2AE5566123DC636E6EC48AFC0272DF3AD9CD7A88EB64B2C2953F5EAA16380145
createdAtMillis - 1727457523830
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 - 1
notHelpfulOutdated - 0
notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 1
notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
ratingsId - 18396618812308113362AE5566123DC636E6EC48AFC0272DF3AD9CD7A88EB64B2C2953F5EAA16380145