I said essentially the exact same thing about you and you disagreed with me. lol.
Untrue. What you say about me (and other cte users) is that we are self-deluded and in a religious cult.
You don't know why selling a product under false pretenses is a problem? The dollar amount shouldn't matter, and $100 is not chump change for many people. Simply put, Stan makes claims he does not and cannot know are true. He even says he doesn't know how it happens, but he is sure that it does. Those claims make his method very attractive to the average players who probably don't even know what the hell Stan is really claiming. (If they did they'd probably think twice). Why don't you infuse your cases with some Chinese chi while the kids are over there making your cases in their "school"? Then you can show how that chi is transferred to the cue, helping the player do better. I think it will improve sales.
Just some ideas...
What false pretenses? You're really one of those keyboard lawyers aren't you?
False pretense is knowingly communicating false information for personal or commercial gain. Intent is the key concept here. If someone intends to deceive and they do then they have operated under a false pretense.
If a person makes a claim that they fully believe to be true and there is no way to prove that they knew otherwise then they will likely never be charged with or prosecuted for fraud.
If a person makes a claim that cannot be proven to be untrue and the likelihood of being true or substantially true is high then they will not be charged with operating under false pretenses.
Do you honestly think that you could prove that Stan is deliberately selling something that he knows does not work as claimed? If so then prove it.
Or are you simply looking to nitpick and try to say that you don't agree with any claim of being objective without a qualifying statement of how objective it is?
I am pretty sure that you don't live your life comparing the claims made about products with any disclaimers that might be present. And I am equally sure that you don't act like a one-man version of consumer reports with extensive product testing.
But I can say this with confidence. The difference between 100% objective and 99.9% objective isn't fraud. It is inconsequential and any attempt to discredit the provider would be laughed out of court. Any attorney who would take your money and tell you that you any chance in that regard would be operating under false pretense in my opinion.
As for your little racist comments..... Hard to conceal your true nature when your premises are constantly shot down.
You could use some balance in your chi.