I think the term you were looking for is "agnostic".
Much like atheist means "Not a theist", agnostic means "not knowing." It comes from the word gnosis,
meaning knowledge.The default condition is not having knowledge. (and through that absence of knowledge, not having any belief in any particular god)
Much like the distinction you are making, (hard vs soft atheism), there is a distinction between agnostics as well. Hard agnostics, like myself, assert from a purely logical point of view that knowledge of a supernatural god is impossible, and thus anyone stating that they know such knowledge is spreading falsehoods. This includes affirmative statements against the existence of such entities. Rather than take such a positive position on the debate, the hard agnostic states that the question is worthless to even bother with, and just ignores it as irrelevant. The soft agnostic however, simply has never encountered any information at all about any particular god, and thus by default has no knowledge. (For instance, the absence of knowledge I have about any belief systems that extra-terrestrials might have. I have never met an ET, so I have no clue whatsoever about what ET believes.) Soft agnostics have the potential to become either theists or atheists, depending on circumstances. (ET could come down from the sky and share the great virtues of the Juffo-Whup, and win them over for instance.) Hard agnostics do not, having consciously chosen to ignore the issue completely, due to its irrationality.
It is my argument, as a hard agnostic, that hard atheists and devout theists are both "equally wrong" in their assertions of knowing something about a divinity.