What is the criteria of an intentional lie, then? Admission?

The author responded:

>denschub 2 days ago [–]

>the robots.txt on the wiki is no longer what it was when the bot accessed it. primarily because I clean up my stuff afterwards, and the history is now completely inaccessible to non-authenticated users, so there's no need to maintain my custom robots.txt

Which is verifiably untrue:

HTTP/1.1 200 server: nginx/1.27.2 date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 13:37:20 GMT content-type: text/plain last-modified: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 18:52:00 GMT etag: W/"1c-62204b7e88e25" alt-svc: h3=":443", h2=":443" X-Crawler-content-encoding: gzip Content-Length: 28

User-agent: * Disallow: /w/

> intentional lie

There are no “intentional” lies, because there are no “unintentional” lies.

All lies are intentional. An “unintentional lie” is better known as “being wrong”.

Being wrong isn’t always lying. What’s so hard about this? An example:

My wife once asked me if I had taken the trash out to the curb, and I said I had. This was demonstrably false, anyone could see I had not. Yet for whatever reason, I mistakenly believed that I had done it. I did not lie to her. I really believed I had done it. I was wrong.

No worries, I understand. The author admitted to me that he was lying via DM, that he often does this for attention.