Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-11-06 23:21:05 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0B210D6BEE87E82C1441DBD6F81CDE21AB0BC53985EA86A0F77E76D61212F378
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 - 0B210D6BEE87E82C1441DBD6F81CDE21AB0BC53985EA86A0F77E76D61212F378
  • createdAtMillis - 1730935265519
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 1
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 18542744780811962280B210D6BEE87E82C1441DBD6F81CDE21AB0BC53985EA86A0F77E76D61212F378