I’m sure you know this, but the reasons given for lying here are by no means the only ones. I would guess that most lies are motivated by thoughts more like “If I tell X the truth, they will quite rationally and in pursuit of their own reasonable goals take actions I don’t like. So I’ll tell them something else so that they act in a way that suits me better”. But of course that sort of lie doesn’t fit into the framework here (nor is there any reason why it should).
Yeah, people tend to use the term White Lie to refer to these kinds of situations. However, the term White Lie attaches certain connotations of being morally permissible, which Conor might have wanted to avoid. Another way to accomplish this is to write “White Lie” with quotations.
This example is a lie that could be classified as “aggression light” (because it maximises my utility at the expense of victim’s utility), whereas the examples in the post are trying to maximise other’s utility. What I find interesting is that the second example from the post (protecting Joe) almost fits your formula but it seems intuitively much more benign.
One of the reasons I feel better about lying to protect Joe is that there I maximise his utility (not mine) at expense of yours (it’s not clear if you lose anything, but what’s important is that I’m mostly doing it for Joe). It’s much easier to morally justify aggression in the name of someone else where I am just “protecting the weak”.
I do feel those are strongly related (my definition of “appropriate” or “good” differs from theirs), but I agree that it doesn’t fit in with the words I wrote above.