As I understand it, the conflict is that essentially this: Person A has adopted a word to mean a certain static thing. Person B interprets that word differently (or persons B-Z).
Person A is entitled to feel it is ridiculous, sure.
Person B is equally entitled to feel ownership of that word, unless you think that Person A's prior self-identification with that word or longer history of usage is sufficient to warrant some sort of authority over its common usage.
Would you understand why someone who self identifies as a geek might be offended if you were adamant that they didn't "embody geek culture"?
Words mean different things to different people. People got worked up over pg's supposedly narrow interpretation of the word "startup" in "Startup=Growth".
Do what you do.