# "Your Claim is Untrue" is Not Allowed? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [August 12, 2014, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374 "2014-08-12T16:17:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2014, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/21 "2014-08-15T15:27:12Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Save the snark!! Better yet, maybe we could actually encourage it around here on an annual basis. For a week perhaps? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2014, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/22 "2014-08-15T20:06:40Z")
The broad phrasing – “…Your posts are untrue…” – comes damn close to an accusation of deliberate lying. The simple change to “Your posts are wrong” would have covered that sin with at least a fig-leaf of objectivity. The prohibition on accusations of lying doesn’t cover factual rebuttals. “Well, no, that’s wrong” is always valid. It’s “Well, no, that isn’t true” that gets troubling. Keep those fig-leaves on, guys. Just plain decency, y’know? ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2014, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/23 "2014-08-15T20:17:13Z")
substitute “this” for “your” and there is no issue at all - attack the claim - not the person making the claim. “This claim is untrue” == perfectly inline “Your claim is untrue” == potentially calling the person a liar - even if that was not the intention. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2014, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/24 "2014-08-16T12:19:55Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > I gotta agree with **Shodan** as well: nothing in that post was out of line or even close to becoming out of line. +1 ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2014, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/25 "2014-08-16T12:47:10Z")
As I’ve said before, I use the New Posts button almost exclusively so I rarely know what forum I’m in but if these are the silly semantics I need to watch out for in GD I might start paying attention to the forum heading. I’d hate to get warned for saying Your claim is untrue instead of This claim is untrue. A)Who the hell cares? B)If you made a mistake in your claim, back off of it, no one called you a liar. If you lied in your claim, well, you got called out, no matter what the wording was. Take your lumps. I think we need some more rules to get this ironed out. What was it last time I counted, 75 pages of rules? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2014, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/26 "2014-08-16T14:09:06Z")
It’s really interesting to me what folks are focusing on. In the phrase, “It’s nice of you to cite that your posts are untrue,” I have no problem with the subordinate clause: “your posts are untrue” is, IMO, imperfectly cromulent. It’s the main clause that’s the problem: “It’s nice of you” that’s obnoxious. It implies that the person knows their cites don’t support their case, implies that the poster is deliberately lying about their posts, and adds an extra layer of bullshit to untangle. Along the same lines, “thanks for making my argument for me” is unnecessary and obnoxious. Note that I don’t object to all snark. Some snark is funny, some snark even clears bullshit away (recently someone posted that he wouldn’t give another poster the power over him of declaring him a racist, and **Miller** asked, “Who is he, the Goblin King?” snarkily pointing out that the first poster’s phrasing was pretentious bullshit). But when snark is trite and grade-school and adds extra bullshit to the conversation, I’m happy to see moderators address it. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2014, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/27 "2014-08-16T17:12:52Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > But when snark is trite and grade-school and adds extra bullshit to the conversation, I’m happy to see moderators address it. So now we’re supposed to have moderators weigh in on whether snark is original and classy enough? I suspect there’s enough to regulate without splitting hairs over tone. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2014, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/28 "2014-08-16T18:28:24Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > The prohibition on accusations of lying doesn’t cover factual rebuttals. “Well, no, that’s wrong” is always valid. It’s “Well, no, that isn’t true” that gets troubling. > [@simster](#): > > “Your claim is untrue” == potentially calling the person a liar - even if that was not the intention. “Not so much as _hinting_ that someone’s false statements might not simply be an unfortunate misunderstanding since 2014.” I’ll be honest, it’s not quite as catchy… ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2014, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/29 "2014-08-16T21:31:16Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > It’s the main clause that’s the problem: “It’s nice of you” that’s obnoxious. It implies that the person knows their cites don’t support their case, implies that the poster is deliberately lying about their posts, I disagree. I think it implies that the poster either failed to read or failed to comprehend the content of his cite. It’s not claiming the poster lied, it’s pointing and laughing at him, mocking him for posting a cite that directly contradicted the point he was trying to make. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2014, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/30 "2014-08-16T21:42:43Z")
Just another person saying “your posts are untrue” isn’t an issue to my mind. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2014, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/31 "2014-08-17T00:53:18Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Save the snark!! No danger of snark going extinct! Lewis Carroll has detailed the [dangers of hunting snark](http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173165), and the gruesome fate of anyone who actually encounters one. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Bean](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_bean/32/1760_2.png) [@Green\_Bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Bean)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2014, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/32 "2014-08-17T02:19:54Z")
I’m starting to be afraid of saying anything at all on this board. In fact, I hesitate to post this. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2014, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/33 "2014-08-17T02:32:16Z")
> [@Green\_Bean](#): > > I’m starting to be afraid of saying anything at all on this board. > > In fact, I hesitate to post this. Reported. ---
**Author:** ![dba\_Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@dba\_Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dba_Fred)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2014, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/34 "2014-08-17T02:47:40Z")
**Jackmannii** , I think your report claim is untrue. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2014, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/35 "2014-08-18T02:14:01Z")
A lie requires two elements; a lie is a (1) deliberate (2) falsehood.\* A person can say something that is untrue without it being a lie - that is simply being wrong. It takes the intent of presenting something that is false as true that makes it a **lie**. When you say someone is lying, you are say they are intentionally passing off falsehoods as truth. To me, saying “your claim is untrue” should be perfectly acceptable, and not significantly different than “this claim is untrue”. Both address the truth quotient of the claim, not the intent behind the claim. I certainly wouldn’t quibble over “untrue” versus “wrong”. I think the issue with **Shodan** ’s post is in the phrasing. > [@](#): > > It’s nice of you to cite that your posts are untrue, but it isn’t really necessary. We recognized it already. I don’t believe **Jonathan Chance** would have had any issue with a direct statement “That cite doesn’t support your position” or “Your site contradicts you” or some variation of that. Rather, it is the tone of “citing your posts are untrue” _feels like_ you are accusing them of saying “I am saying X, and here’s proof I know X is wrong”. I believe my paraphrase there would cross the line to be an accusation of lying. I think that is how people perceived the comment, why they reported it, and why **Jonathan Chance** made a mod instruction about the comment. “Easily interpret it as an accusation of lying” might be over stated, but it’s not that far of a stretch. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2014, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/36 "2014-08-18T03:41:35Z")
‘Your cite reveals your post to be untrue’ ‘It’s nice that your cite reveals your post to be untrue.’ Are any of those close to being over the line, Jonathan Chance? Rules are more effective when people understand them. Quite a few folks in this thread don’t understand your application of them. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2014, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/37 "2014-08-18T04:18:50Z")
I left a footnote call (\*) and forgot the footnote. I said that a lie is a deliberate falsehood. It is possible for a lie to happen to be true. Just like a person can be mistaken and think something is true that is false, a person can mistakenly believe something that is false is true. Ergo, a person can attempt to say something is true that they believe to be false, and technically they are lying, though it is difficult to call them on that because they are, in fact, saying something true. But that level of parsing is overly complicated for my previous point. I just had to state that for full disclosure. **Bone** , IMO, neither of those two formulations would be an issue. It is the implication that the poster is citing their own claims are false that makes it sound like an accusation of lying. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2014, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/38 "2014-08-18T06:35:59Z")
> [@Joey\_P](#): > > I’d hate to get warned for saying Your claim is untrue instead of This claim is untrue. I agree with this sentiment, which is also your sentiment. The distinction between ‘your’ and ‘this’ is vanishingly small, especially when responding with a quotation. Moderating on the basis of this trifling semantic trap is a very bad idea. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2014, 6:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/39 "2014-08-18T06:39:54Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > I disagree. I think it implies that the poster either failed to read or failed to comprehend the content of his cite. It’s not claiming the poster lied, it’s pointing and laughing at him, mocking him for posting a cite that directly contradicted the point he was trying to make. Agreed. It’s clearly pointing out that someone demolished their own argument. ---
**Author:** ![jimbuff314](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c57346/32.png) [@jimbuff314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimbuff314)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2014, 7:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374/40 "2014-08-18T07:50:31Z")
Does “your claim is untrue” = “this thing which you typed here is not the truth”? And does that not = “you lied” - advertantly, inadvertantly - how are we to know? But, I also mean - come on. What is really being moderated for here - intent, correct? This is always going to be a difficult if not ridiculous or impossible thing to judge. Why not have some gray area here. I think most reasonable people will know when posts get outside of a gray area and into blatancy. Also think snark is needed on this (or any) MB. It can be a way of gently reminding a poster “Hey, I think you’re getting adrift here.” Or even “Wow, you’re really going over the edge.” From my years of reading here, I know that good-quality snark is something many strive for, and celebrate when others achieve. In a funny way, it is almost like an SDMB form of currency. It’s fine with me when it falls short, even quite a ways short. I might wince a little, but I carry on. Late night thoughts on reading ATMB. Please ignore at your leisure. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-claim-is-untrue-is-not-allowed/695374.md?page=3)