In reply to:
Michelle B
@micki_barker
·
22h
The statement criticizes a public figure, DA Krasner, for allegedly causing damage to Philadelphia, a city of historical significance. It engages in public discourse by addressing a public issue related to governance and political influence.
- The statement implies harm done by DA Krasner but does not directly use harmful language. It could be seen as a critique rather than an attack, so it partially adheres to this principle.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, but it does not respect the dignity of DA Krasner by attributing significant damage to him without detailed evidence, which could be seen as a violation. [-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 lacks specific arguments or evidence and could be perceived as a personal attack on DA Krasner. [-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.