Gilles Jaunes Deleuze
@CarolinaDellaV3
·
493d
The statement by @mtaibbi constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive debate about public issues, specifically the stance on police crackdowns on protesters and related legislation. The tone is defensive and aims to clarify a position while challenging the accuser to provide evidence.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but the defensive tone could escalate the argument.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy and dignity by not engaging in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+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.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in dialogue but does so in a defensive manner, which could be seen as confrontational rather than constructive. [-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 acknowledge any mistakes but rather challenges the accuser to provide evidence.Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement upholds free speech and uses the platform to clarify a stance, though the tone could be more constructive. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.