Are you claiming all ROLEPLAYING activities are not games? In this case, your definitions are not widely shared.

There are many classes of games that don't involve losing, and some that don't involve winning either. Cooperative games, roleplaying games, artistic games are some examples of genres that don't involve winning or losing.

EVE does have instances (for solo), or at least it had something similar back when I played. Also, EVE can't accommodate ten million people on one server. Maybe some years down the road, with some technology advances (cloud computing?) and significant game redesign, it may somehow become possible... But not yet.

Different people focus on different aspects of the game as large as WoW. I believe your experiences are valid - within the set of playing activities you experience yourself. Please don't over-generalize it to everybody, though. PvE and RP servers (or players) won't be affected as much, because world PvP has never been a big part of their gaming. Guilds raiding progression content will still raid together, because it takes consistent grouping - and their realm-specific social networks will stay within realms because of it. Arena teams, as well, are realm-based. Wintergrasp is a rather popular, successful way to make outdoors PvP meaningful and concentrated in time and space, and it won't get any worse.

The only minus I see for my style of playing is the inability to form Friends list cross-realm and to chat with friends from other realms. I usually add to my Friends list from groups I pick up. I hope Blizzard implements these options soon. They already made a step toward it with cross-realm Ignore list.

How can people call something that works "not viable"? What is wrong with getting support from people who like you and your work, directly? As you said in your last sentence, it would work for almost ANY endeavor.

Well, there are certain mayhem and killing urges in young men, probably biologically mandated - even best and brightest engage in such activities. One may argue that we are better off if such urges are channeled into fake worlds, rather than bringing death to real people and destroying real constructions and nature.

It is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT for game mechanics to be intrinsically connected to the content. "Solve an exercise, reload a gun" demotivates the content of exercises, because they are seen as obstacles to some (other) prize. It takes a bit more thought to figure out how to make your content a necessary part of the game play, but it's worth it.

For a good math example in particular, try Zoombinis.

This is a scary slippery slope. After some nasty atrocities, major international conventions now protect the rights of individuals to decline medical procedures.

As for scientific evidence, huge monetary conflicts of interests tend to erode people's trust. Can you blame people for that? Take the story of thimerosal (thiomersal). Even after it was officially prohibited in baby vaccines, the old ones were not recalled. How can one read this? If it's safe, why prohibit it? If it's not safe, why not recall it? Stories like that undermine the trust.