-3
The statement is a reaction to a tweet from a media outlet discussing a public issue related to border wall materials and government actions. It reflects engagement with a public debate concerning policy decisions and government actions, thus constituting public discourse.
- The statement itself does not directly cause harm, but the context of the conversation could potentially lead to harm if it incites negative actions or sentiments.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 the broader conversation could potentially involve such elements depending on the responses it generates.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 a reactionary comment without substantive content. [-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, as it is a brief, emotional reaction without further elaboration or discussion. [-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.
- There is no indication of acknowledgment or correction of mistakes, as the statement is a simple reaction.Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement does not use influence for societal betterment, as it lacks substantive content or a call to action. [-1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech but does not demonstrate responsible use of the platform, as it lacks depth and constructive engagement.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.