In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
276d
The statement critiques the US government's handling of drone incursions, suggesting disinformation and a failure to control airspace. It implies a lack of transparency and accountability, raising public safety concerns.
- The statement suggests potential harm by accusing the government of disinformation, which could undermine public trust. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It challenges the government's transparency, implying a lack of respect for public awareness and safety. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement engages in criticism of the government, which could be seen as constructive if it leads to accountability, but it risks being perceived as an attack without evidence.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.
- By raising concerns about airspace control, it aims to use influence to address public safety issues. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.