Sure it is, if you mean that it is being done with the intent of making the ideas understandable to people unfamiliar with particular jargon.
Anarchists have a long history of appealing to "the masses" through plain speaking. Alexander Berkman's "What is Anarchism" is a good example of this, as are many of Crimethinc's publications ("Fighting for Our Lives", "A Civilian's Guide to Direct Action", "Don't (Just) Vote..."). This is an important part of propaganda.
While there are anarchists who are critical of such things, I think that in many cases it just makes sense to appeal to and discuss ideas in language that the other conversant will understand. Otherwise, what point is there to doing so? While that might be dismissed by some as cynical, manipulative, or condescending, I reject that. While it certainly can be done for such purposes, it could also simply be so that the language, contexts, examples and so forth are ones that the other person can relate to. If the goal of a particular action (such as talking to someone) is to spread ideas, it is important that those ideas are understandable.
To be clear, not every situation is a place to drop anarchist jargon (though to be fair, if you use a lot of jargon, I would encourage reading dot's "Breaking the Code" http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/dot_matrix__Breaking_the_Code.html,
as well as other similar critiques - Crimethinc included some in issues of Rolling Thunder), and anarchists ought to ground their actions in what they want to do, not in mass-movement thinking (if I can deign to say what anarchists *should* do)
Where I do have a problem with this sort of thing is when people do so while obscuring their end goals (ie their anarchism) in the hopes of gaining more popular support. This is the sort of trick that lots of Marxist groups use to try to recruit new newspaper vendors (er, militants! proletarian militants!) I don't adapt my language to win converts, I adapt it to communicate effectively. In some cases, jargon is helpful, in others not. If one is always on one side or the other of that, I'm suspicious of them.
After all, the other side of this question might be: how does using anarchist jargon cause non-anarchists to react to my ideas? Again, it depends on the situation. Sometimes it shuts people down; they experience that jargon like a bat i am wielding within the conversation. At other times it is helpful, in that it has more precision. When you drill a tooth, you want a finer tool than when you beat a nazi.