In reply to:
Mike Benz
@MikeBenzCyber
·
8d
Autism Capital 🧩
@AutismCapital
·
8d
The statement by @MikeBenzCyber constitutes public discourse as it engages with a significant public issue concerning the potential TikTok ban and its implications for US diplomacy and social media companies. The reply by @MikeBenzCyber expresses concern about the impact of the ban on US diplomats and social media companies, indicating a substantive engagement with the topic.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions, as it focuses on the potential diplomatic impact of the ban. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement aims to promote understanding by highlighting the potential consequences of the ban on US diplomacy, which can foster empathy and compassion for those affected. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, instead focusing on the issue at hand. [+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.
- By discussing the potential impact of the TikTok ban, the statement uses influence to raise awareness about a significant societal issue. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech principles by responsibly discussing a public policy issue. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.