Agnostic: a pointless term?

[robvalue]

This was a thread I started what seems like ages ago, and since reading everyone's responses, I have been convinced that agnostic is indeed a useful term and the gnostic/agnostic distinction is worthwhile. Thanks very much for your input everyone!

I have since discovered a third stance (sorry for those who have already read me go on about this) which is ignostic. This states that no meaningful definition of God has been put forward that is worthy of discussion, as all definitions are incoherent and/or unfalsifiable. It's basically a dismissal of the question as pointless. It's asking for an opinion about either something not properly defined, or something that by definition I cannot know anything about. The question has about as much point and validity as asking me to guess what number you're thinking of. No meaningful discussion can be had other than to discuss the problem with the question. So although I'd informally call myself agnostic, I'm more accurately ignostic. I'm aware that some people think this is a pointless distinction, and I respect that