I think your definition is fine, there are a lot of atheists here who enjoy it a lot, me included, and you and me and whole bunch of others have something in common as a starting point. They'll be debates along the way but that makes it interesting and worthwhile. Enjoy

Let me be perfectly clear. I advocate a modern scientific world-view and my holdings-forth here are articulations from that perspective. I recognize that the majority of people are pretty much oblivious to this perspective, though some give it lip-service. Many people still embrace supernaturalism enthusiastically and others simply do not want to confront that powerful segment of the culture. I see things quite simply as a choice between light (evidence and reason) and dark (superstition) and choose the light. Many are more comfortable in the shade. This crowd seems pretty shady to me. Which I suppose makes sense given its name. I'm going to toodle off now and leave you all to your comfort zones. Thank you for your time.

I am an agnostic - anti-theist.

I'm with Penn Jillette on this:
Agnostic and atheist answer two different questions:
Agnostisc: We cannot know fur shur how our universe started: without knowledge
Atheist: There ain't no all powerful invisible critters: there is no reliable proof of such a being.

And I agree with Sam, and Christopher,... 'Atheist' is a word created by theists to identify their 'enemies.' No words for not believing in santa, unicorns, astrology,...

I am an anti-theist because I oppose religionists imposing their mental illness on all us good folks.

Atheism and agnostic are used in different perspectives. Atheism is the disbelief in God, and agnosticism is the knowledge whether God exists or not. I am an agnostic atheist btw

I am a gnostic atheist, when someone makes up a bullshit story I don't give it credence just because a lot of people do believe it and I'm not "unknowing" because I can't prove somethings "non-existence". I can't imagine a reality where other peoples absurd beliefs make me question my understanding of basic reality.

I joined this site to have conversations with people who wouldn't make me feel like it was necessary to believe in a deity and wouldn't shy away from me because I didn't. I'm having a wonderful time here and feel very comfortable opening a topic about anything on my mind. Open is open. Do we need labels for that?

The purple screen that comes up when you open tbe app tells you all you need to know...nor is there any test to join.

I agree with you. I'm the same.

I felt quite irritated on sign-up here, because the questions were pushing me in one direction or another.

For me, God is unknowable. So I'm agnostic.

Labels people use can tend to mean different things to different people. While I am personally 100% sure that a god does not exist I still consider myself agnostic due to the fact that we can never really know until we are dead.

Some other people would say being 100% sure automatically makes you an athiest.

Try not to focus too much on such labels.

I am just happy for any kind of positive community to be a part of. It can sure be tiring being a nonbeliever in Texas.

I completely agree with your definitions, except that I'd leave out the word "probably". Huxley's origination of the term was based on the unfalsifiability of the Abrahamic god-claim. If it's not falsifiable then no supportable knowledge claim can be made, either way, ever. Supernatural beings and realms cannot be proven.

I am curious in what ways that the people posting are indicating that they are not open-minded or free-thinking. Got any examples?

Atheism and agnostic are used in different perspectives. Atheism is the disbelief in God, and agnosticism is the knowledge whether God exists or not. I am an agnostic atheist btw

My impression is that the overwhelming majority of participants at this website are atheists and not agnostics. But there are a few of us agnostics, so welcome.

So what seems to not fit for you?