Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-11-06 23:41:16 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 57805736D56DA2C637EDED2F696B5D54B2426F7900E0FFF64DA25A7D5B02780C
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 - 57805736D56DA2C637EDED2F696B5D54B2426F7900E0FFF64DA25A7D5B02780C
  • createdAtMillis - 1730936476632
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 1
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 1
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 185427447808119622857805736D56DA2C637EDED2F696B5D54B2426F7900E0FFF64DA25A7D5B02780C