SYN:
I think that gumby is quoting some of that from this website;
Neon; Not quite; that would be an iglooologist; I'm pretty sure it would have three 'o's in the middle... an iglooist would be someone who made igloos, perhaps? Or someone who played them? Does anyone here know anything about the acoustic properties of igloos? But an iglogoist is definately either someone who doesn't know words, or considering the running-dog etymology of the neologism, someone who is incapable of telling logos apart; is it Nike? The big M? Come on, give me a clue! The big yellow M, I'm sure it's Nike...
Gumby; nah, freethinkers doesn't define the general parameters of the thoughts thought, it only defines the modus sentiandi of those thinking the thoughts. Brights, for all its obvious antonymical association (which I fear doom it), does define the general parameters of thought of those claiming it as an affiliation.
It's like the difference between 'a football supporter' and 'a <insert team name> supporter'
Special prize to anyone who actually knows the Latin congugation of sentient I've guessed as sentiandi on the basis that 'modus operandi' is right, so it might be... hell, it sounds good; "Bah! Typical of your modus sentiandi"
... or should I get out more...?