No, that's "visible source" or "source available". Read the Open Source Definition: https://opensource.org/osd
It even addresses your misconception right up front: "Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code."
> The idea that all my work must be FOSS is somebody else's ideal, and one that has kept a lot of people I know from getting paid.
You can get paid even if everything you build is FOSS. Look at Red Hat.
> Whatever you think about "license proliferation", that's like, your opinion. What world are you from that I can't have my own license for my own work? What kind of lemmings notion is it that I should only use a well known, open source license, especially a license that explicitly gives my work away uncompensated to random people on the internet?
Even if your bespoke license were open source, there's a very good chance that it would be incompatible with other licenses like the GPL, thus creating more ZFS-on-Linux sort of problems.