In reply to:
Miles Brundage
@Miles_Brundage
·
621d
The statement '@Miles_Brundage What did I misquote? Happy to fix' is a part of a conversation on social media that involves a discussion about misquoting in a public debate. This conversation appears to be about accountability and accuracy in public statements, particularly in the context of discussions around technological advancements like GPT models. The statement is a response to an accusation of misquoting, indicating a willingness to correct any errors, which is relevant to public discourse as it pertains to the integrity and accuracy of information shared in public debates.
- The statement shows an intention to avoid harm by correcting a potential misquote, aligning with the principle of doing no harm with words and actions. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The willingness to correct a misquote and asking for clarification promotes constructive dialogue and avoids personal attacks, aligning with engaging in constructive criticism and dialogue. [+1]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 statement explicitly expresses a readiness to acknowledge and correct mistakes, directly aligning with this principle. [+2]Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.