The statement questions the decision to appoint Linda McMahon as the education secretary, implying skepticism about the seriousness of the decision and its implications for the Department of Education. It engages with public discourse by addressing a political appointment and its potential impact on public policy.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but implies skepticism about the decision, which could be seen as questioning the competence of the appointee.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 question the dignity of the appointee by implying her agency might be erased. [-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 promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is more critical and skeptical in tone. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does not provide constructive dialogue or evidence to support its skepticism, nor does it engage in personal attacks. [-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 uses free speech to question a public decision, which is a responsible use of the platform, but it could be more constructive.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.