Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-03-06 14:54:52 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 3BC7C51111B8ABEEE7F0248AFBF189D4DF3A8D1691E3AA3072986DC45C51449D
Participant Details

Original Note:

Poster claims that "the Strasbourg-based court rejected every single argument Georgescu made", but it only ruled admissibility based on Romanian law and Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. https://www.echr.coe.int/w/inadmissiblity-decision-concerning-romania-1

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1897650575270945241
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 3BC7C51111B8ABEEE7F0248AFBF189D4DF3A8D1691E3AA3072986DC45C51449D
  • createdAtMillis - 1741272892116
  • 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 - 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 - 18976505752709452413BC7C51111B8ABEEE7F0248AFBF189D4DF3A8D1691E3AA3072986DC45C51449D