Yes, when two Wallet of Satoshi users pay each other no sats are exchanged. WOS just updated their internal records of users. So I expect you to be calling for WOS to not use the term sats since no sats were exchanged.
Discussion
the fact that you are trying so hard to confuse users that cashu tokens is bitcoin is deeply worrying. This is a very troubling ethos of Cashu.
eCash are tokens that can be exchanged for sats. This is clear, there is no confusion.
Notice how you sidestepped the question. This reveals a weak point in your argument: that for a transaction to be labeled as "sats," the transaction itself must consist of sats being exchanged. By this logic, you wouldn't classify any custodial wallet-to-custodial wallet transactions as "sats," implying they shouldn't use the term at all. It's a valid stance to take. If that's your belief, I have no issue with it. Just make sure you are consistent in that view.
No sats are being exchanged in this transaction. Should WOS be using the term sats? 