Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-06-03 13:43:48 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 44E90EC5BA50D7BC419B5F2A851A037AE2D69640137AD3128562AE1C1267DDAC
Participant Details

Original Note:

La noticia miente. La IFAB no ha reconocido que "debió haberse repetido el penalty". De hecho, admite como "entendible" el haberlo señalado como fallo, ya que "no penalizar un doble toque sería injusto". A partir de ahora: Doble toque + gol de penalty = repetición de éste. https://theifab.com/downloads/circular-31

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1929884286779265290
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 44E90EC5BA50D7BC419B5F2A851A037AE2D69640137AD3128562AE1C1267DDAC
  • createdAtMillis - 1748958228103
  • 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 - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • 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 - 192988428677926529044E90EC5BA50D7BC419B5F2A851A037AE2D69640137AD3128562AE1C1267DDAC