The problem is that those are a really vague and metaphorical 4-5 lines so it's hard to argue against somebody projecting whatever the hell meaning they want on

The problem is that those are a really vague and metaphorical 4-5 lines so it's hard to argue against somebody projecting whatever the hell meaning they want on to it. I'd argue that "agile" where I have done it and it worked well is at its core about tightening up OODA loops - with code (refactoring+tests+iterative improvements), with customer interaction (frequent interaction/experiment driven tests), with team organization (retros, adapting team processes). Feedback loops are, however, not mentioned once in the philosophy and neither are any concrete examples of "agile" or "not agile". Agile as a concept will stop being broken when people stop saying "to me, agile means X". Which will probably never happen - I suspect people will just stop talking about it one day and start using different terms for all the concrete steps that are sometimes filed under "agile" but which actually work.