It is unfortunate that Edwards likes to create concepts with definitions and then utterly change the meaning of words to fit whatever skewed understanding that he wants to create.
In particular, this review of Sorcerer & Sword really opened up my eyes to Edwards' obscurification. I think I just made that word up. Anyways here's the link:
http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13811.phtml
I stick by Venger's model because it makes the most sense to me:
Gamist focuses on games. Simulationist focuses on simulating a particular setting/genre (which all RPGs do up to a point). Narrativist focuses on characterization and story. No RPG (still in print) exalts character and player-influenced stories than World of Darkness, save for some indie games which I usually don't play. Sure, WoD can be played with a focus on Gamist or Simulationist play, but that's not how the system was designed or what the core rules describes.
Therefore, by definition, a RPG that focuses on the narrative (character and story) is Narrativist. If Edwards wants to say it's something else, that's his deal. He has his own cult, and I guess Venger has his.
Zoltar