Let's look at this (non-)issue in a broader sense. What was the point of applying the adjective "active" to particular devices?
"Obviously", it was to distinguish them from non-active devices. And prior to the Audion, there /were/ no active devices -- devices that /amplified/.
Several years ago we had an insane argument, in which a significant number of posters claimed that transducers were amplifiers, twisting the definitions of these terms into perverse forms.
We are now told that a PIN diode -- which is no more than a switch -- is an active device, apparently because it's made of semiconductor material, which /just happens/ to be used in active devices. So -- duh -- they must both be active devices.
What does the material have to do with it? A switch is a switch. Switches are not, and have never been, considered active devices. Do PIN diodes get a special break, just because they're semiconductors? Are we now supposed to classify the power switch on a table radio as an active device?
Calling an electrical generator an active device is meaningless, because it doesn't draw any useful distinction with "inactive" devices (such as a rake or a step ladder). An if an electrical generator is an "active" device, why isn't a log? A log can be burned to produce energy.
Human beings are incredibly stupid. They believe what their parents tell them, and almost always stick ferociously to their childhood beliefs throughout life. They believe that whatever pops into their heads is true, and these beliefs can only rarely be shaken. Worst of all, humans hardly ever ask "How do I know whether something is true or not?" Of course, in a democracy it doesn't matter. One person's point of view is as good as any other person's.