Difference between revisions of "Verdict:AfeDfiAjb9afEdf9ajBi/3"

Latest revision as of 16:14, 8 June 2022

Not permitted

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 |User=User:Isophist
 |Truth=no
-|Truth percentage=95
+|Truth percentage=75
-|Truth text=The rules have been followed and there is reasoning behind the choice. But when looking at it from the big picture it just doesn't make sense that a big oil company is in this list and Tesla isn't
+|Truth text=Unless the rationale for the criteria are clearly explained it is difficult to understand how such a decision to keep an oil company on an ESG list but drop an EV car maker.
 |Whole truth=no
-|Whole truth percentage=100
+|Whole truth percentage=90
-|Whole truth text=There are lies and truths mixed together
+|Whole truth text=Depends on the context.  The truth according to S&P or the "real" truth?
 |Nothing But the truth=no
 |Nothing But the truth percentage=100
 |Nothing But the truth text=-
-|Deceit=That Exxon is doing a good job while they knew about climate change 40 years ago and haven't done enough about it
+|Deceit=That sustainability is a clearly defined idea with broad agreement.  Without that clarity it is easy to state that Exxon's actions are more sustainable than Tesla's.
 |Deceit percentage=100
-|Deceit text=-
+|Deceit text=
 |Deceit intended=yes
-|Deceit intended percentage=60
-|Deceit intended text=You would think they can reason that this doesn't make sense at all
 |Motivation=Helping big oil companies
-|Motivation percentage=100
+|Motivation percentage=95
 |Motivation text=-
 |Social acceptability=Unacceptable