K. Douglas Mooney
@DirectNewsComm
·
695d
The statement begins with a call for pragmatism and consistency, suggesting a thoughtful approach to political discourse. However, it ends with a dismissive and potentially inflammatory remark towards the original poster's opinion, which could be seen as engaging in the kind of conflict it initially seems to discourage.
- The statement starts positively but ends with a phrase that could be harmful or offensive, violating the principle of doing no harm with words. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not directly violate privacy or dignity, but the dismissive tone could be seen as lacking respect for the dignity of the original poster's views.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The initial call for pragmatism promotes understanding, but the final remark lacks empathy and compassion. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement fails to engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, instead resorting to calling the other's notions 'stupid'. [-2]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.