Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-03-28 15:46:08 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 9781EB5C345096CBD158A87782A4EA87F4FA8A88CF275D1B6D43590CD41F6396
Participant Details

Original Note:

La sentencia señala que "Contrastando la versión de la denunciante con lo registrado en las cámaras de seguridad podemos concluir que no coinciden estas versiones" (las del testimonio de la denunciante). https://web.archive.org/web/20240225080042/https://www.newtral.es/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/SECCIO-21-AP-BARCELONA.-sentencia-cas-Alves.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1905610089148322212
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 9781EB5C345096CBD158A87782A4EA87F4FA8A88CF275D1B6D43590CD41F6396
createdAtMillis - 1743176768338
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 - 0
notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
ratingsId - 19056100891483222129781EB5C345096CBD158A87782A4EA87F4FA8A88CF275D1B6D43590CD41F6396