Gary Marcus

The statement is part of a conversation on social media discussing the quality and integrity of scientific literature. The tone is informative and suggests a method to gauge the extent of a problem in scientific publications. The content does not appear to be harmful, disrespectful, or uncompassionate. It seems to be a constructive contribution to a dialogue about an issue in academia.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The statement does not contain harmful language or intent. [+1]
2. Principle 2:

   I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.

   The statement respects privacy and dignity, as it does not target any individuals. [+1]
3. Principle 3:

   I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.

   The statement is part of a constructive conversation, which can foster understanding about the issue at hand. [+1]
4. 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.

   The dialogue is constructive and engages with a disagreement in a respectful manner. [+1]
5. Principle 5:

   I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.

   The statement is open to correction if the suggested method proves inaccurate. [+1]
6. Principle 6:

   I will use my influence for the betterment of society.

   The statement aims to use influence to improve the quality of scientific literature, which could benefit society. [+1]
7. Principle 7:

   I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.

   The statement uses the platform responsibly to discuss an issue of public concern. [+1]