Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-10-16 09:56:06 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 16690E0F256179307589DD093B9515771EF18E05844272EA5EC9298E190D590C
Participant Details

Original Note:

In its statement on the resolution, the US ambassador stated they opposed the resolution because it "does not articulate meaningful solutions for preventing hunger" and provided no definition of what was meant by a "right to food", among other disagreements. https://usun.usmission.gov/explanation-of-vote-of-the-third-committee-adoption-of-the-right-to-food-resolution/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1846401572898853051
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 16690E0F256179307589DD093B9515771EF18E05844272EA5EC9298E190D590C
  • createdAtMillis - 1729072566535
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 184640157289885305116690E0F256179307589DD093B9515771EF18E05844272EA5EC9298E190D590C