In reply to:
Mocking SF Values
@Mockingsfvalues
·
124d
The statement '@Mockingsfvalues @realDailyWire @MattWalshBlog And you too, bluto' appears to be a part of a larger conversation involving public figures and a discussion on race and identity. Given the context, it can be considered public discourse as it engages with societal issues related to race and identity.
- The statement does not appear to cause direct harm, but it does not actively strive to do no harm either. It is neutral in this regard.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, but it does not show respect for privacy and dignity either. It is neutral in this regard.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 does not contribute positively to the conversation. [-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 dismissive and could be seen as a personal attack or ad hominem argument. [-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 uphold the principles of free speech responsibly. It is dismissive and does not contribute meaningfully to the public discourse. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.