Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-11-05 06:17:52 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 6FBC79B9C6D049917DD90FC458426C41F511AA05FE34BDF9FF11CBC9894E0AAD
Participant Details

Original Note:

Vox, an openly biased source, notes that this study is also biased. "But ideally, in a study about bias, the authors wouldn’t be using data they themselves assembled." Also, CN is an Ambiguity Fallacy: as a case to outlaw free speech would itself, be a free speech case. https://www.vox.com/2014/5/6/5684270/epstein-parker-segal-supreme-court-free-speech-study-do-justices-defend-the-speech-they-hate

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1853599049439424554
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 6FBC79B9C6D049917DD90FC458426C41F511AA05FE34BDF9FF11CBC9894E0AAD
  • createdAtMillis - 1730787472863
  • 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 - 18535990494394245546FBC79B9C6D049917DD90FC458426C41F511AA05FE34BDF9FF11CBC9894E0AAD