In reply to:
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·
8d
The statement criticizes a public official, suggesting that their continued employment poses a safety risk to the people of Los Angeles. It engages with public discourse by addressing concerns about public safety and the qualifications or actions of a public servant.
- The statement implies harm by suggesting that the official's employment endangers public safety, which could be seen as a violation of striving to do no harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in direct harassment or hate speech, but it does target an individual's professional competence in a public forum, which could be seen as disrespectful to their dignity. [-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 engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, as it makes a personal attack on the official's competence without providing evidence or engaging in a reasoned argument. [-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.