What would a "Yes, this is based on chi" answer look like?

(Actually, you aren't arguing that chi questions are a good idea, so maybe that's an unfair question to ask you. Sorry)

I assume this discussion has sprung from skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/34364/…

There are several problems with that question (lack of notability; the referenced video doesn't make the chi clai, etc)

But I have the most problems with the premise, which is "I just saw a magic trick - how was it done?" When challenged, the question became "It was presented as Chi energy, which I know isn't a real thing", which is equivalent to "It was presented as though the magic word 'hocus pocus' made it happen".

Either way, spoiling the magic trick doesn't improve anything.

@Sklivvz Regarding skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/34362/… : yes, the term "propaganda" can be used, but it's not commonly used. People would usually and normally call it a political leaflet or pamphlet.

@AndrewGrimm to me, they are synonyms but the "proper" term is "propaganda". Let me check the dictionary :-)

> the organized dissemination of information, allegations, etc, to assist or damage the cause of a government, movement, etc

(that's british)

> Official government communications to the public that are designed to influence opinion. The information may be true or false, but it is always carefully selected for its political effect.

(that's american)

I think this qualifies as both (well, except is not the government)

(source: dictionary.com/browse/propaganda)

Simply describing it as a "pamphlet" would imply that they claim to be impartial, whereas it's clear that it's an ad.

Maybe, though. I don't know.

I am not a native speaker, I know in Italian "propaganda" is the actual term used by everyone (actually it's "electoral propaganda").

Any other English native wants to pitch in?

I don't think you want an English native. The natives are getting restless. :p

I agree it's pejorative, but not in the sense of being false. I don't think it would bias the answers.

OK, this actually nails the point down. To me "propaganda" is an objective term in this case. I'm not calling, say, a textbook I don't agree on "propaganda". I am calling political advertisement "propaganda", which is exactly what it is, objectively.

Uh, why? I'm sorry to hear that. As long as your edit does not go against my original intentions you should just do it -- and I told you above that I'm only using it in the objective sense of "political advertisement". If you think the message conveyed is different and want to help me with an edit, just do it.

At times, who doesn't? It's you getting defensive now, though :-) Worry not!

Are you calling ME defensive? How dare you!

(I have also used "propaganda" to mean any marketing material designed to influence opinion, but I can't deny it has negative overtones, much like "criticism" implies "negative criticism".)

@Dawn arg. Forget about my reactions... I'm 100% on your side

hope this helps. if not, we can blame @Oddthinking (one of the perks of being a mod is guilt free blame targeting)

The other perk is always being blamed for everything!