Thanks, Quidam. I haven’t seen Buddhist online communities that different from other traditions with their respective communities as it relates to how people discuss stuff. I mean, in terms of people maybe splitting hairs and focusing on labeling. In that regard, welcome to the club 
!
On the other hand, I have found that, eventually, I assign some labels to certain Buddhist teachings. That I find myself saying, Yes THAT is this and it’s not the other thing or somehow beyond definition.
That is, at some point, the definition – however weak or strong it may seem – is what helps me shape the practice. I start somewhere and, with lots of different inputs from teachers and experienced practitioners, I mold the practice toward awakening. (Or at least staying awake more and more because it doesn’t sustain itself – I’m not an arahant.)
It doesn’t allow for a lot of metaphysical speculation. Or if the discussion starts going there, eventually a Buddhist practitioner will ask What Is This Based On? Because at its root the Buddha’s teaching is rather empirically based.
My two cents, anyway.
Which is why I appreciate this from Ven. Brahmali: