If people call any simple style of development/review that works "agile", then what about when developers go through the motions to do "real" Agile Development (TM) and it doesn't? Is that not "agile" anymore?

That's like when TDD advocates claim credit for the benefits of doing any testing at all, but only acknowledge the costs of doing orthodox TDD (if that). It's dishonest, and makes it harder for anyone to have any kind of meaningful discussion about what does and doesn't work.

I'm not arguing that there's a benefit in having a development / testing / review cycle, but when discussion turns to capital-m Methodologies, it tends to become us-versus-them, more about following the methodology's branding and other trappings to the letter than whether things actually work.

[Edited a bit for tone, and to make it less personal]