Yeah, and when everyone has their own definition, the term becomes meaningless.
I've always assumed it meant to appeal to as many people as possible, and simplicity would be a part of that (being able to play something straight away as opposed to needing to read a 100 page manual before starting), but I don't think simplicity necessarily means sacrifice. For example, an RPG features 50 different skills but for the sequel it's cut down to 10. People will complain that the sequel is dumbed down, simplified for the masses, but what if the 10 skills of the sequel were all important and all had a drastic effect on the course of the game, while the 50 skills of the original were mostly fluff that changed little? In Deus Ex a skill like swimming is worthless compared to a skill like computers, but what Harvey Smith came to realise with the failure of the sequel is that people really like having lots of different choices, even if those choices don't actually change much. So which game is more appealing to the LCD, the seemingly simple sequel with fewer options that change the course of the game, or the apparently complex original with far more options which do little to change the game but are meaningful in how the player sees their character?
Being an elitist means believing yourself to be part of a superior group, it doesn't doesn't mean you actually do anything important or worthwhile.
Yep, that pretty much describes so-called elitist gamers, though whiners is really a more appropriate term.