Is total points really due to player activity alone?

[CombatEX]

EDIT: Well, just read Eijolend's post and he puts it perfectly so mine probably isn't necessary ^^
_______________________________

Clarification/Misconstrued Argument
For all intensive purposes, points represent activity. No one has said points correspond to 'only' activity. To take an extreme, obviously if you lose all your games you're going to be at 0 points no matter how active you are.

'Activity' Points
The following is what I believe people are trying to convey when they say 'points represent activity':

You cannot tell how good a player is based on their points. You can only tell how bad a player is (if they have very few points but a lot of games played then you can extrapolate that they must lose a lot). There is a way you can compare players to a very rough extent using points but that requires being able to see how many wins each player has and performing a weak estimate as to their win/loss rates. However, points are pretty much meaningless when looking at rankings in a division because you can't see the profiles (and hence the wins) from the division rank screen. As such, points end up being a more accurate estimate of activity than of skill. This is more due to the fact that it's a terrible measurement of skill while it is an okay, though still flawed, measurement of activity.

Demoralization
As for your 'demoralized' feeling when players call points useless for determining skill, I'm sorry you feel that way. However, I'm not going to lie and pretend they are meaningful just to give people a false sense of accomplishment =/ Getting promoted to a new league is what people should be after, not points. When one gets promoted that's a true accomplishment that one can be proud of! Not hitting some arbitrary point threshold. Hopefully OML can find the time to implement bonus pool (and seasons if possible) so that players can actually see improvement accurately reflected in their points, but until that day having high points is nothing to be proud of.

OML Offended?
As for OML being in some way offended that people don't like their current point system, that isn't the case. Alex mentioned a few months ago that the point system could certainly use an overhaul and he would look into a bonus pool system or something similar in the future to make points reflective of skill.

Your Poll Question
Your poll presents an issue because your proposed question makes the 'yes' option illogical and I doubt anyone believes that statement as it is worded. Remove 'alone' and you'll have a better poll. Even though I believe points are mostly representative of activity, I certainly don't believe they boil down to activity 'alone', just mostly. As such, I should technically vote 'no'. In fact, nearly everyone should vote 'no' because the 'yes' option is idiotic. However, I ultimately voted 'yes' and chose to ignore the word 'alone' as I believe the other people who likewise voted the same also chose to do.

Instead, I would ask "Are total points mostly representative of player activity?"
Even that isn't ideal, but it maintains the basic structure of your original question and I didn't want to alternate it too much. Personally I would question "Are points a somewhat meaningful indication of skill?"
I insert 'somewhat' because I don't think anyone believes they are truly a meaningful indicator, just that some may think it means more than it actually does.