Gary Marcus

Rank 16 of 47
|
Score 71
9/13/2024, 10:27:11 PM
X
In reply to:
Dianne Whitehead
@diannew314159
·
344d
@GaryMarcus Setting aside for a moment, the ugliness of that post, the lunacy of her claims is simply mind blowing. What kind of people believe such insane nonsense? Rhetorical question of course. 🤦‍♀️
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
344d
Nobody better represents what X has become than Laura Loomer.
Alex Cole
@acnewsitics
·
344d
I thought this was fake, she really said this racist shit.

The statement 'It’s a purity test / shibboleth thing' is a response to a conversation criticizing a controversial and inflammatory post by Laura Loomer. The statement itself is brief and somewhat cryptic, suggesting that the original post serves as a litmus test for ideological purity or group identity. This analysis will focus on how well the statement upholds the principles of public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but is part of a conversation that involves strong criticism and potentially harmful rhetoric. It neither significantly upholds nor violates this principle.
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by not engaging in personal attacks or hate speech. It adheres to this principle. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is neutral in this regard.
  4. 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 engages in the dialogue without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It adheres to this principle. [+1]