It is often an excellent starting point, and can also serve as a fine ending point in many of the debates where nothing divides the sides except for the (mis or differing) taking of a term. It is never my intention to have Webster carry the whole load of a complex argument.
I'm afraid this is where we're going to have to agree to disagree. A dictionary can never make for an ending point to a discussion, not a constructive one anyway. The only such ending point is the pomposity of an ass declaring himself the victor because he has a dictionary which says the same, or something similar, to what he says. I'm sure he may feel secure in such a 'victory' but he has achieved nothing other than the deepening of his own ignorance.
There can be no "clarification nor understanding" so long as each participant resorts to private meanings. Not anymore than we can play chess with each of us holding strictly to our own version of the game's rules.
I told you precisely how it can be done earlier. Perhaps you weren't listening?
A recipe called 'Mr.Pilkington's Cheese Based Savoury Snack Foods' calls for the use of cheese.
Bob says that he quite likes using feta in the recipe.
Mary says that feta isn't cheese, as it doesn't come from a cow, and so the end product does not qualify as 'Mr.Pilkington's Cheese Based Savoury Snack Foods'.
After discussion it transpires that mary prefers to use the term 'cheese' to refer only to coagulated cow's milk, while Bob prefers to use the term to refer to any coagulated milk.
They agree, for the purposes of their current discussion and in order to avoid a semantic loggerheads, to refer to Mary's notion as 'Cheese1' and Bob's notion as 'CheeseA'.
They both agree that feta makes for a good end product, but Mary insists that it is a variation on 'Mr.Pilkington's Cheese Based Savoury Snack Foods', and not 'Mr.Pilkington's Cheese Based Savoury Snack Foods' itself.
Eventually they contact Mr.Pilkington who clarifies that in the recipe he had intended to mean only coagulated cow's milk, though he prefers to use the term 'Cheese' to mean 'CheeseA', the ambiguity was simply an oversight. He thinks that Bob's variation on his recipe is good, but not the genuine article as he had intended it, which involves only the use of 'Cheese1', or as he prefers to call it 'Cow's Cheese'. The three carry on a discussion of cuisine that carries on over an extensive period of time by correspondance. They are soon able to drop the reference to 'CheeseA' and 'Cheese1' because they are capable of seeing beyond the way they personally use the terms, and capable of understanding that it is not just the term which defines the meaning, but also its source, so Mary has no problem in understanding that when either Bob or Mr.Pilkington refer to cheese they mean any coagulated milk while Bob and Mr.Pilkington understand that when Mary says cheese she does not mean anything other than coagulated cow's milk.
Your analogy to chess, is flimsy, at best.
A signpost pointing east does not point to the same place as another signpost that points east, if it is 20 miles north.
Actually, a good, up to date, dictionary can be quite exhaustive, especially when used in conjunction with a Fowler's Usage, and the appropriate encyclopedia. An individual's private useages can do nothing to advance communication, and a great deal to subvert it. A good debate, like a duel, should begin with an agreement on terms. But, no one attends a duel, after agreeing to its terms, thinking that the hard part is over.
Apparently you think the terms have already been decided for us, by the good people at Webster's. Your analogy to a duel would be confirmation of my position, not yours.
French has a central authority defining the proper usage of the language; English does not. Anyone who adopts such an authoritative pose is a charlatan; a veritable Emperor Norton