Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-10-16 05:14:02 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 50C3A3498D35C22AB48B204FC8AFBB23C857492FA52195CC91EB38691B393DD5
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 - 50C3A3498D35C22AB48B204FC8AFBB23C857492FA52195CC91EB38691B393DD5
  • createdAtMillis - 1729055642395
  • 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 - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • 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 - 184640157289885305150C3A3498D35C22AB48B204FC8AFBB23C857492FA52195CC91EB38691B393DD5