Ushgarak wrote:
frankly I think trying to find suitable other titles like "Outliners" or some such thing would just descend into ridiculous farce.
Ushgarak wrote:
If people then have sub-titles that define what kind of Writer they are, then fine.
Hm, those statements don't seem to match. Using "Writers" and "Editors" (another term which could work for this, and sounds just as important as Writer) is a
farce, but using "Writer:Modeler" and "Writer:Conceptualist" is
fine!?!?

So under that system, what would you call me, a modeler *and* a designer *and* a musician *and* a graphic artist? I'm afraid my business card is not big enough.
Clearly, you are only interested in defending the title "Writer" for everyone, and not the practical application of the Guild structure or identity. That's fine to have only that one concern, it is, because it's important that that concern is raised, but you have to balance your concerns (which I do share) with other equally important concerns.
So other than the semantic use of the word "Writer," what's really the difference between your argument and mine (which makes my proposal only a hair better than no Guild at all

kidding!

)? Can you actually propose some sub-titles that would be "fine"?