In reply to:
Pete Skomoroch
@peteskomoroch
·
129d
The statement is a response to a public discussion about the qualifications of advisors involved in AI policy, specifically related to SB 1047. The tone is defensive and somewhat confrontational, aiming to correct perceived misinformation about the advisors' qualifications and the focus of Encode Justice. The statement includes a personal attack ('this is bullshit') and defends the qualifications of Ms. Revanur, emphasizing her experience and current academic status.
- The statement partially violates the principle of striving to do no harm with words and actions by using a confrontational tone and the phrase 'this is bullshit.' This language can escalate tensions rather than promote constructive dialogue. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of Ms. Revanur by defending her qualifications and contributions. However, it could be seen as disrespectful to the original poster by dismissing their concerns in a harsh manner.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement aims to promote understanding by providing context about Ms. Revanur's qualifications and the focus of Encode Justice. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not fully engage in constructive criticism and dialogue, as it includes a personal attack and dismissive language. [-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.