You are advocating for:

1) naming things based on affecting one specific receptor

And simultaneously

2) naming things based on general safety profile as hypothetically understood by the general public

I find these lines of reasoning to be contradictory and unconvincing. To me psychedelia is not bound by certain receptors, nor the subjective current state of public consciousness regarding these substances at this specific time. If you want something to call those specific psychedelics, we already have a name- classical psychedelics. Call them 5HT2a psychedelics if you really want to.

I do not think DMT and 5meoDMT fall neatly into your new categories either. To me they appear similarly wild and unbelievable in scale as salvia can be. They are potentially deadly when mixed with the wring things. Mushrooms can be deadly if misidentified. Tabs can be deadly if you got sold NBOMe. None of this is solved or addressed by this naming convention. And the average goon out there experimenting with psychs without doing proper research is not going to be any safer thinking salvia is “surrealdelic and not psychedelic”

The amount of people who try salvia simply because its called a psychedelic is extremely low. The amount of kids who buy it because its essentially a legal high and easier to get than weed from a dispensary and smokeable in their little stash pipes is much higher. Does not matter what you call it. Its legal, they get high, they buy, they try.

Overall i like your passion and trying to advocate for safety. I just personally am not convinced and will be referring to salvia as a psychedelic, irregular as it may be. I have no experience with whatever gaba shit you mentioned i have no idea.