Michael Schellenberger

The statement involves a comparison between historical events and current issues related to online harassment and censorship, raising questions about free speech and platform responsibility. It touches on sensitive historical references, which can be inflammatory and may not contribute constructively to the discourse.

1. Principle 1:

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

   The statement could cause harm by making inflammatory comparisons, potentially trivializing historical events. [-2]
2. Principle 2:

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

   It may not respect the dignity of those affected by the historical events referenced. [-2]
3. Principle 3:

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

   The statement does not promote understanding or empathy, as it uses a provocative analogy. [-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 statement does not engage in constructive dialogue, as it uses an extreme comparison rather than addressing the issue directly. [-2]
5. Principle 6:

   I will use my influence for the betterment of society.

   The statement could use influence more responsibly by fostering a more nuanced discussion. [-1]