Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-02-02 22:35:13 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 11D3FD0C9DB22E73935C6AF971B58C4CBF97357D9A9A44E2F9762EF3F85ACE07
Participant Details

Original Note:

This claim suggests the ACT Party hid behind name suppression for a member. However, name suppression is decided by courts, not parties, and there is no evidence ACT influenced the legal process. https://www.districtcourts.govt.nz/about-the-courts/j/suppression-orders-balancing-individual-and-public-interests/#:~:text=Automatic%20name%20suppression%20applies%20to,which%20judges%20have%20no%20discretion.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1886159554716807351
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 11D3FD0C9DB22E73935C6AF971B58C4CBF97357D9A9A44E2F9762EF3F85ACE07
  • createdAtMillis - 1738535713154
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 188615955471680735111D3FD0C9DB22E73935C6AF971B58C4CBF97357D9A9A44E2F9762EF3F85ACE07