Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-11-07 01:00:36 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 002F3F69C70B4F9678B46C465C34C681E6BF81F484C950639014374E7B2D22F6
Participant Details

Original Note:

https://www.sankei.com/article/20241106-44YPLYVTQRLU5AOLOO72SZ3GQQ/ リプライや引用ポストには他人の保険証を不正使用したと誤認するものがいくつか見られましたが 本件は居住実態の無い自治体が保険者の本人名義の保険証を使用したことを罪に問われています。

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1854274478081196228
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 002F3F69C70B4F9678B46C465C34C681E6BF81F484C950639014374E7B2D22F6
  • createdAtMillis - 1730941236724
  • 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 - 1854274478081196228002F3F69C70B4F9678B46C465C34C681E6BF81F484C950639014374E7B2D22F6