Gary Marcus

The statement is part of a conversation that involves a public figure's controversial opinion on a political issue, specifically Trump's tariff plan. The original statement by @GaryMarcus uses derogatory language and presents a biased view, which could be considered public discourse as it addresses a public policy issue. However, the reply by @jedgarlopez and the subsequent reply 'yep i should have' do not substantively engage with the public issue or contribute to the civic dialogue. They are more conversational and do not address the public issue directly.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The original statement by @GaryMarcus uses harmful language, which violates the principle of doing no harm with words. [-2]
2. Principle 2:

   I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.

   The use of derogatory terms in the original statement disrespects the dignity of others, violating this principle. [-2]
3. Principle 3:

   I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.

   The original statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it uses inflammatory language. [-2]
4. 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.

   The original statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, as it resorts to personal attacks. [-2]