Inside the industry we refer to lobbied games as MMO if the number of subscribers is high enough and the servers/infrastructure is centralized (e.g., the net code doesn’t only put two players together, but continues to manage the connectivity, the profiles, items, stats, etc.)

Maybe a good way to describe this is: Guildwars and Diablo 3 are as much MMO as WoW, even though both don’t have a persistent world (in fact, diablo 3 is built upon nearly the exact same technical designs as WoW… its just that the game design doesn’t put everyone in the same place)  

The sad part is, I personally would also /want/ to use it for gameswhere a world is persistent, since these are generally more interesting.  Alas, within the industry the term MMO is now in the hands of people who deal with money (finance/budgeting/etc.) and is unlikely to change.

… at least internally.   I suppose it doesn’t really matter what it is refered to by players themselves…  :)

Global Agenda, Tribes: Ascend, and StarCraft II are _NOT_ MMOs. I’m not sure where you get that impression.