In reply to:
ihor gowda
@ihorgowda
·
535d
The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages in a discussion about the allocation of research funding, which is a public issue. The tone is dismissive and critical, suggesting that the $100 billion spent on research is mostly wasted.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but could be seen as dismissive of the efforts of researchers, which might indirectly harm their morale. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.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 promote understanding, empathy, or compassion; it is dismissive and critical without providing constructive feedback. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it is a dismissive remark without substantiating its claim. [-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 does not use influence for the betterment of society; it dismisses significant research funding without offering alternatives or solutions. [-1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech but does not use the platform responsibly or with integrity, as it dismisses a significant issue without constructive input. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.