The statement indicates participation in a public discussion about a proposed amendment, which suggests engagement with a public issue. However, without additional context or content from the discussion or the linked website, it's challenging to fully evaluate adherence to the principles.
- The statement itself does not contain harmful language, but without further content, it's unclear how the discussion might adhere to this principle.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy and dignity, but further content is needed to assess adherence to this principle.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 provide enough information to determine if it promotes understanding, empathy, and compassion.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in personal attacks, but further content is needed to assess constructive criticism and dialogue.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 or correct mistakes, but this may not be relevant without further context.Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement suggests using influence to discuss a public issue, which could be for societal betterment, but more context is needed.Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by engaging in public discourse, but responsible use of the platform cannot be fully assessed without more content.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.