Terminological inexactitudes and Wakeup

A terminological inexactitude is a phrase first used by Winston Churchill (who had a US mother), and which has subsequently become a euphemism for a lie.

Wakeup has been proven to use a lie in a recent thread, and the subject under debate is the extent to which this has been a feature of his contributions on eccie, and the extent to which they are acceptable in these fora.

The proof his recent lie is as follows:

Quote by OP :

I'm hispanic/white. It says Caucasian because I am.

Quote by Wakeup

I did read it. It says she's Caucasian. She admits she's not.

Quote by Wakeup

My reason for propagating it is that there is no falsehood in my statement. She has admitted that she's Mixed, not Caucasian...I thought that was made clear earlier...

So Wakeup made the initial lie, and then compounded the offence by following up with a further lie.

How many lies has Wakeup can be proven, and are there any other clear, non contentious, occasions when he has been found guilty of lies?

I'm afraid I am old school, lies lead to the downfall of western civilisation. I donlt give a toss about Wakeup, but i do give a toss about lies.

terminological inexactitudes. Originally Posted by essence

Didn't even bother reading this.

Didn't even bother reading this. Originally Posted by TheCat'sMeow

I didn;t want to be unparliamentary, and worse gain points, by accusing him of being a liar. But wait.....I have edited it to make it easier for you.

Stating one's case based on his understanding of a particular term is not the same as lying.

If that were the case, I would say you are a liar for calling him a liar.

As far as the subject of this thread goes, I am not agreeing with wu nor with the OP.

Semantics are a bitch.

Stating one's case based on his understanding of a particular term is not the same as lying.

If that were the case, I would say you are a liar for calling him a liar.

As far as the subject of this thread goes, I am not agreeing with wu nor with the OP.

Semantics are a bitch. Originally Posted by YummyMarie

You are diverting. She said she is Caucasian. He said she admitted she was not Caucasian.

What could be simpler?

He is a liar.

It is nothing to do with interpretations or understandings of what Caucasian means (although he got that wrong too).

If WU had said:

'I understand that you consider yourself Caucasian, but, as a white-hispanic, I am afraid you do not fall under the Caucasian category'

then I would have said the WU is grossly mistaken, but refrained from saying he is a liar.

However what he actually said was a lie because he said she admitted something which she did not.

Do you understand the distinction?

WU is a liar.

Semantics are a bitch. Originally Posted by YummyMarie

In this context, should semantics take a singular verb, or a plural verb? Discuss.

In this context, should semantics take a singular verb, or a plural verb? Discuss. Originally Posted by chicagoboy

Irrelevant diversion. He stated an untruth.

Semantics are a bitch to discern.

Summarizing instead of quoting directly does not make one a liar.

So, Churchill is AMerican, not British??????????????????????? ?????????

Irrelevant diversion. He stated an untruth. Originally Posted by essence

Which is exactly what he was saying about her.

Semantics are a bitch to discern. Originally Posted by YummyMarie

Again it is nothing to do with semantics.

I say I am 20 years old.

WU says I admit I am 40 years old.

WU is a liar. When the error is pointed out to WU, he digs deeper and repeats the lie.

Semantics don;t come into it.

geez.....

So, Churchill is AMerican, not British??????????????????????? ????????? Originally Posted by Pistolero

Half and half, I thought that was well known?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Randolph_Churchill

Which is exactly what he was saying about her. Originally Posted by YummyMarie

There are many untruths and interpretations.

I am concerned with the simple case where she said she was Caucasian, and he said she admitted she was not Caucasian.

Untrue.

Mendacious lie.

It's like you saying, "I'm 20."

My response, "Your showcase says you are 19."

You, "Well, I am 19 but I will be 20 in a few days."

Me, " so you are saying that you are not 20..."