If you're not familiar, please see my post:
This is both an academic and opinion poll. First, my opinion, shared by many agnostics.
An agnostic should not be referred to as an atheist
While this opinion is shared by many agnostics we have no illusions we'll change the established vernacular. However, for 90% of the population, the label atheist carries sinister connotations. For them, it is the unbelievers' equivalent to fanatic or evangelical. For gnostic atheists, these parallels are not without merit.
Personally, the Dawkins scale is most applicable (with exceptions) because it indicates the linear range of cosmological ideologies and can be directly compared to political ideas ranging from far left to far right.
My exception is 2-6 describes those who do not claim knowledge, ie agnostics. We should not be clumped in any category which suggests we are gnostics.
Your opinion: Which system, if any, is your preferred classification system and why?
I would posit that, over time, people move up and down the continuum of “non-belief”. These reasons for this movement include mood, maturity, relationships, situational context, education, etc. Add to that the variability between individuals. Maybe a better indicator would be if you are active or passive in your “non-belief”.
It feels like the whole naming thing is an intellectual exercise that doesn’t add much value. A rose by any other name is still a rose.....
I would prefer a "gullibility" scale, but that's just me, I suppose.
If I choose to worship elves that live in unused shoes, well, that can not be disproved. So, where does that leave the agnostic? Do they have to make room in the religiscape for my shoe elves too?