[Mabus]

This is where the whole argument fails, as the basis of your logic is at fault in the argument.

You state that:
1) Part of my definition, before my recent modifications, is what has been accepted by a small group in the past.
2) A new definition has developed independent of this small group, and been accepted by a larger group recently.
3) Therefore others are wrong and my older, but now modified, definition is correct.

It is (partially) the logical fallacy of "Appeal to Antiquity".

I normally would not point out logical fallacies in an open public forum debate, as I believe that opinions matter and can be taken as a valid means of communicating. But since you asked that no opinions be used you have asked for a higher standard of debate.