how is that the same
when what you used as your example to discount Bookbug's use of the label, is incest?
Of course you've come up with a theoretical example where something doesn't fit. People don't use the term triad on this site unless all three are fucking. That's fine. People here get bent out of shape, as this is like the justice system of Polyworld, where everything is right or wrong according to precedence.
So at polyamory.com, you need to go vee, Bookbug. Even low in reality, I would agree you are very much in a triad, not a vee. If you need to label things for clarity, the triad label is much closer, as it sounds like more than where you all have a bed, you are involved in each other's lives. There are no walls, no screens for privacy, and you don't want them, as there is no separation between the three of your lives.
You didn't misspeak, Marcus, just contradicted yourself, or possibly completely discounted a person's experiences with poly, or concerns about dynamics, when you said:
For all of the other forms of poly which are not group-sex oriented, this is not a question that is relevant.
... as if semantics are going to change her experience.
So as to the question presented by Flowerchild, it can be a problem, or it could be one where there is no problem to get around. The same way giving your situation a different name won't do much to change your experience, unless you are playing games with yourself, and attempting to force yourself to be okay with some things you are not, or possible find a problem that really isn't a problem and use it as an excuse. Both things happen all the time.
However, there are people with mature enough attitudes, who don't drastically change their character depending on who they are with or where they are. It is completely possible to be fully integrated into each other's lives without having sex with the bisexual. You could have threesomes, but it really doesn't matter, as you can be "fully integrated" as three people in each other's lives, and whether or not it's called a triad, or if someone foolish claims you are not fully integrated.
As it depends nothing on any of the information given here, and it is ok to make every assumption you want when you are talking about possibilities and dynamics because they can probably be accurate with certain people and not possible with others.
So regardless of anyone else's opinion or experience, it could be a problem, but it doesn't have to be.
It depends on the people and the aspects that make up their lives. If you are a couple that eats, drinks, and breathes camping, then a person who gets uncomfortable going to a park unless they can see cars whizzing by can have all the sex she wants with both partners at once, and each of them separately, but she isn't likely ever going to be "fully integrated" into their lives if the couple is always camping somewhere any day they don't have to go to work in the morning because camping is such a big part of their life.
On the other hand, a person who is always camping with the couple, and loves being around them, maybe even cuddles with them under a blanket every night by the fire, but does not kiss or have sex with either of them, could easily be considered fully integrated.
It has more to do the breakdown or makeup of whatever it is that is the majority of each person's life, and how much involvement there is between the three of them.
If sex is the major component in your life, you can still have a person be involved with your sex life and not actually be engaging in sex acts. But the truth is, being involved in each other's lives is more important than both the presence of love and sex, when speaking about being fully integrated
Another thing that happens is people are saying and doing two different things, and it doesn't matter if it is an honest mistake or intentional. Usually people who get all uptight about the precise meanings of words are smart enough to know the difference between the meaning of being "fully integrated" into a couple's life, and how that communicates something completely different from "fully integrated sexually," or being "sexually fully integrated."
These semantics problems are not normally a problem because people who demand precision so that they know exactly what you are talking about do not use terms imprecisely, and if they do, it is likely a case of them being manipulative.
If it were not them being manipulative, there won't be any problems, because in today's world, we have such a robust and complete vocabulary in so many languages that anything can be clearly communicated, while at the same time the simplest notion can also be obfuscated intentionally for personal benefit over all others.
