In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
492d
The statement by @Jason constitutes public discourse as it engages with a public issue, specifically the topic of violent rhetoric and its impact on society. The conversation addresses the interpretation of tweets related to political violence, which is a significant societal concern.
- The statement by @Jason does not cause harm and promotes a peaceful resolution by acknowledging the need to calm down violent rhetoric. [+2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by not engaging in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+2]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding and empathy by agreeing that reducing violent rhetoric is beneficial for the country. [+2]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by responding positively to feedback and not engaging in personal attacks. [+2]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 acknowledges and corrects a mistake by taking down the tweets after a clarifying interchange. [+2]Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.