Technically True But Misleading Conduct Applied to Engineer B Title Sheet Notation
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/173#Technically_True_But_Misleading_Conduct_Applied_to_Engineer_B_Title_Sheet_Notation
Properties
Instance of
TechnicallyTrueButMisleadingStatementProhibition
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#TechnicallyTrueButMisleadingStatementProhibition
Applied to
Engineer B's title sheet notation on the public improvement plan set
Balancing with
Change Notation Specificity Requirement in Successor Design Obligation
Concrete expression
Engineer B's title sheet notation that he was 'taking responsibility for the revisions' was literally true but created a materially false impression — that the revisions were specifically identified and Engineer B had accepted full accountability for them — when in fact the notation was so vague as to be virtually meaningless as a professional accountability mechanism
Confidence
0.87
Importance
high
Interpretation
A technically accurate but uninformative notation that creates a false impression of meaningful accountability accountability is ethically equivalent to a misleading statement, regardless of whether the deception was intentional
Invoked by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Tension resolution
The Board found Engineer B's conduct misleading 'either intentionally or unwittingly,' establishing that the ethical standard focuses on the impression created, not the intent behind the notation
Source Evidence
Source text
We view the conduct of Engineer B under the facts of this case to be misleading either intentionally or unwittingly.
Text references
Engineer B's failure to state with specificity what those changes in fact were made such a notation on the title sheet virtually meaningless.
His failure to do so constituted a form of deception which places him in violation of Section III.3.a.
We view the conduct of Engineer B under the facts of this case to be misleading either intentionally or unwittingly.
TTL
@prefix case173: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/173#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case173:Technically_True_But_Misleading_Conduct_Applied_to_Engineer_B_Title_Sheet_Notation a proeth:TechnicallyTrueButMisleadingStatementProhibition,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Technically True But Misleading Conduct Applied to Engineer B Title Sheet Notation" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer B's title sheet notation on the public improvement plan set" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Change Notation Specificity Requirement in Successor Design Obligation" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer B's title sheet notation that he was 'taking responsibility for the revisions' was literally true but created a materially false impression — that the revisions were specifically identified and Engineer B had accepted full accountability for them — when in fact the notation was so vague as to be virtually meaningless as a professional accountability mechanism" ;
proeth:confidence "0.87" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "173" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T14:28:53.714541+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "173" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T14:28:53.714541+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "A technically accurate but uninformative notation that creates a false impression of meaningful accountability accountability is ethically equivalent to a misleading statement, regardless of whether the deception was intentional" ;
proeth:invokedby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:principleclass "Technically True But Misleading Statement Prohibition" ;
proeth:sourcetext "We view the conduct of Engineer B under the facts of this case to be misleading either intentionally or unwittingly." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The Board found Engineer B's conduct misleading 'either intentionally or unwittingly,' establishing that the ethical standard focuses on the impression created, not the intent behind the notation" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer B's failure to state with specificity what those changes in fact were made such a notation on the title sheet virtually meaningless.",
"His failure to do so constituted a form of deception which places him in violation of Section III.3.a.",
"We view the conduct of Engineer B under the facts of this case to be misleading either intentionally or unwittingly." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 173 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T14:41:54.508596"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 173 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
173
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T14:28:53.714541+00:00
First case
173
Generated
2026-03-01T14:28:53.714541+00:00
Attributed to
Case 173 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T14:41:54.508596
Generated by
ProEthica Case 173 Extraction