I understand your excitement at the possibility of good results using Sottilo's methods. But, if we don't follow the specific terminology with specific definitions, the message gets lost and the work isn't repeatable. If we create our own terminology for anything we want to do, we can't expect others to get the same results we're seeing. Similarly, if Sottilo chooses to ignore (or even mock) the terminology of the industry, he will have no way to compare his methods to conventional methods, no way to determine if his methods can consistently provide the results he claims, and he will not be taken seriously (and rightfully so) by the industry. There is nothing to gain from improper use of the terminology.
You and Sottilo can claim on this board and in newsletters that these methods produce excellent results, but how can we know for sure that your treatments are causing your results? The scientific method gives us a way to do that. It also requires communicating your materials, methods, analysis, and findings in a specific and detailed manner such that others can replicate the work you're doing.
Do you have the scientific write-up that you could pass along, either by posting here or by PM?