zlacker

>> 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.

>>andrew+(OP)
"Not being candid"? To me that implies not giving all information. Not necessarily lying. Am I wrong?

>>thelit+33
Lying 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.

>>thelit+33
It implies they think he either lied or omitted crucial information.

>>thelit+33
That's corporate for "he's big ol' lying ass liar who lies."

>>meepmo+A7
Correction, its: "he's big ol' lying ass liar who lied to us."

>>dragon+b8
Point taken.

>>andrew+(OP)
> 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".

>>dragon+u5
Isn'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."