The statement and the linked article address the public issue of ranked choice voting, which is a substantive topic in civic dialogue. The tone is inquisitive and seeks to engage the audience in a discussion about the merits of ranked choice voting.
- The statement does not contain any harmful language or actions. It simply poses a question about ranked choice voting. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by encouraging readers to consider the topic of ranked choice voting and its implications. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement invites constructive dialogue by asking for opinions on ranked choice voting, without engaging in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+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 responsibly by addressing a relevant public issue. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.