But the application form asked about pets and you purposefully ignored it and signed the form saying that the information on the form was correct? What is honest about that? Using the "end justifies the means" as an argument or justification doesn't make it any more honest, does it?
In this case maybe it worked out fine. Good for you. Doesn't mean that it always will.
By the way, how would you feel if the landlord "forgot" to tell you that there was a block of apartments scheduled to be built on the empty lot next door when you asked if anything was being planned there?
No, and when it "doesn't work" it will fail to do so *before* anyone signs a contract or has invested any significant time in the matter. Nothing is lost and nobody is misled (unlike the inappropriate analogy you end your post with).
It's not that the OP tried to con th elandlord, the OP changed their approach to get a foot in the door and then opened a dialogue with the landlord directly, face-to-face.
Which is much more effective than filling out a tickbox on a form.
I'm sure the contract has been prepared and signed with correct information on it and nobody has been disadvantaged. The OP is not sneaking pets into the apartment.
We all have our own moral compass and, clearly, lying (even by omission) on a form to which you sign your name is in sync with yours. It isn't with mine. But I guess we will need to leave it at that....