In reply to:
bdandy
@msbrandidandy
·
529d
The statement by @msbrandidandy constitutes public discourse as it engages with a significant public issue, namely the Israel-Palestine conflict, and references a political figure's stance on the matter. The tone is defensive and aims to clarify a position while addressing a broader audience.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but the defensive tone could be seen as dismissive of the concerns raised by others. This is a neutral adherence to the principle.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others and does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. This is a positive adherence to the principle. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is more focused on defending a position rather than fostering dialogue. This is a minor violation of the principle. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It addresses the issue at hand without targeting individuals. This is a positive adherence to the principle. [+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 upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform to engage in a public issue responsibly. This is a positive adherence to the principle. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.