It can be a way of life, however, it's a style too and can be learned as such. Lets just make cool stuff!!!!!
With all due respect I am not a "exclusive", but IMO that is part of the problem - Neo-Tribal is not just a style (a "collector's" definition not a maker's definition, but for me NTSM, is rather more an "attitude"/methodology/intent" than just a style.
One of the early "problems" with the Neo-Tribal MS "school" was many thought it was just a heat and bash and leave it look like "this" without the understanding good blade smithing (too often heat and beat it crap craftsmanship became clothed in the mantle of Ne-Tribal M/S, but by others, including collectors, not the practioners)
With all due respect to Tai and Tim and Dana Acker, et al, the original Neo-Tribalist Metalsmiths, but the methodology and intent is older than the NTMS movement, - Joe Keeslar, who as far as I know coined the term Brut de Forge, Herschel House and his brothers who created a whole school, The Woodbury School, of muzzleloading, which includes not just loading firearms but also knives, etc. which began in the 1960-1970's, and just like with the NTMS movement folks started trying to define it broad terms rather than that of the original intent.
So IMO no it is not a matter of "exclusiveness" (yes Tai and I are friends and colleagues and he is one of the most non-exclusive folks I know) but rather keeping to the original intent, unwatered down by others trying to define it "because" - if you feel that's exclusiveness than I all I can say is you do not understand the original intent or those who practice it still today -
and FWIW - Like Randy and Tai I eschew titles of any kind, in my experience over the last 50+ years of crafting, it is others that apparently have mis-construed the original intent and want to put the square peg in the square hole i.e. want/need to define things to the nth Degree
On the other hand if you want/need to define yourself than go for it, but realize that's all it is - a self-proclaimed intent....