5 ms·
>> it implies he lied It says he lied, explicitly, just with slightly nicer words. Whether he did or not, that is the definitive reason the board is giving.
by andrewstuart 3y ago
>> it implies he lied
It says he lied, explicitly, just with slightly nicer words. Whether he did or not, that is the definitive reason the board is giving.
- thelittleone 3y ago"Not being candid"? To me that implies not giving all information. Not necessarily lying. Am I wrong?
- dragonwriter 3y agoLying by omission is still lying, and is especially a concern when you have a duty to the people who are deceiving, such as an executive has to their board.
- thelittleone 3y agoIsn't that considered deceit rather than lying?[1] [1] ChatGPT "lying is defined as intentionally making a false statement. If you are omitting details but not actually stating anything false, this may not strictly meet the definition of a lie."
- Paul-Craft 3y agoIt implies they think he either lied or omitted crucial information.
- meepmorp 3y agoThat's corporate for "he's big ol' lying ass liar who lies."
- dragonwriter 3y agoCorrection, its: "he's big ol' lying ass liar who lied to us."
- meepmorp 3y agoPoint taken.
- lmm 3y ago> It says he lied, explicitly, just with slightly nicer words. No it doesn't. "Not being candid" does not explicitly mean lying. It's like the old tea towel joke where the people at the bottom say "it's shit" and the manager one rung up says "it's manure" and the next one says "it's fertilizer" and by the time it's reached the CEO they're saying "it promotes growth".