Michael Schellenberger

The statement critiques politicians' support for digital IDs, suggesting they risk their careers and reputations. It implies a negative view of digital IDs, aligning with concerns about privacy and control.

1. Principle 1:

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

   The statement does not directly harm but implies negative consequences for politicians, which could be seen as a critique rather than harmful speech.
2. Principle 2:

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

   It respects privacy but indirectly questions the dignity of politicians by suggesting they are compromising their integrity. [-1]
3. Principle 3:

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

   The statement does not promote understanding or empathy, focusing instead on criticism. [-1]
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.

   It engages in criticism but lacks constructive dialogue, focusing on negative implications without offering solutions. [-1]