A distinction should first be made between "creationist" and "creationism." The former may apply to an individual or be used as an adjective, the latter to an ideology. I do not think you will find a conventional use of the words, just as the words "science" and "theory" are subject to wide and narrow meanings. I am quite sure that is why the debate becomes heated at times.
It is a good thing to seek clarity when other people are trying to communicate with you, so your attempt at understanding how these words are used is commendable. My guess is that you will find people on all sides of the debate using them in different ways, often without thinking through the implications and accuracy (or lack thereof).
> It is a good thing to seek clarity when other people are trying to communicate with you
Yes, but clarity can be damned difficult to come by. I expected this thread to turn into the usual shouting match eventually, but not within the first couple of posts!
So, out of the posts so far, I've got this:
* Those in favor of the "broad" definition of "Creationism" (God did it, maybe evolution, maybe not)
Posts: 9 (USAFJeeper), 12 (AndrewC), 16 (Triggerhippie), 18 (spinestein), and of course my friend
* Those in favor of the "narrow" definition of "Creationism" (God did it via "poof")
Posts: 15 (MitchellC), 19 (thomaswest), 20 (Bonaparte), 22 (taxesareforever), 43 (Alamo-Girl), and of course me.
OK, in more than 40 posts, a total of 11 actual "votes," and I may have mis-interpretted some of those. And so far it appears to be pretty even, though a database of 11 is pretty lean, statistically.
Sigh...