In reply to:
The statement is a reply to a conversation about a significant public issue involving international relations, technology, and censorship, thus constituting public discourse. The tone of the reply, indicated by the use of emojis, is supportive and possibly incendiary, but lacks substantive engagement with the issue at hand.
- The reply does not directly cause harm, but the use of incendiary emojis could be seen as encouraging a confrontational stance. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The reply does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The reply does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion as it lacks substantive content. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The reply does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, as it merely echoes a sentiment without adding to the discussion. [-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.
- The reply uses free speech but does not use the platform responsibly to contribute meaningfully to the discourse. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.