alt Hacker News> my use seems to fit the definition to me
Where is that definition from? It lacks key elements of the definition, notably, an agenda.
Your operating definition would turn the teaching of evolution (or frankly, any education or broadly-communicated message) into propaganda.
That isn’t a serious claim. If it is for someone, that person’s definition of propaganda isn’t the generally-accepted one, which means it’s unclear how they’re speaking about anything else. By being hyperbolic you’re getting downvoted and ignored.
> You are applying personal emotional bias
Nope. I’m explaining why a serious argument you’re making, one that deserves consideration, is being downvoted and ignored for being introduced with a thoroughly unserious assertion.
Right but it was established up the comment chain you aren't in charge of defining shit
You're one rando on a random text forum
You're self selecting as biology do and appealing to authority you don't have
You don't know what's generally accepted beliefs just your own biased belief
Oh no a meaningless social credit score!
I just Googled the definition; it reads the same as the posted definition on various sites; from Merriams to Oxford. Will go with the definition put forth by people who actually do the research not some self promoting random tech nerd
Imo your ego is driving you more than a well reasoned argument; you know how to game reputation on social media ergo you are correct
wanking motion