Andrew Solender
@AndrewSolender
·
46d
The statement refers to a conversation about a serious incident involving a bombing in Yemen and the subsequent reactions from Democratic representatives calling for investigations and accountability. The tone suggests a critique of the priorities in the public and political response, implying that more attention is being given to the use of a group chat than to the bombing itself.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but highlights a perceived misalignment in priorities, which could be seen as a critique rather than harmful speech.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, and respects the privacy and dignity of others.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement indirectly promotes understanding by pointing out a perceived issue in public discourse priorities, though it could be more explicit in fostering empathy and compassion. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in critique of public discourse priorities but does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+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 critiquing the focus of public discourse, the statement attempts to use influence to redirect attention to more pressing issues, which can be seen as an effort for societal betterment. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech principles by engaging in critique and using the platform to address public concerns responsibly. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.