Usually you'd divide what you're talking about into two different steps. Peer discovery, and peer transport.
Discovery is how you find other peers, sometimes its via DHT, sometimes it's hard-coded, other times just random walk. But just like in WebRTC, (and in TCP), you need to get the address from somewhere out of band, so you can connect, usually something like a centralized directory. But the transport of data, is P2P, just like TCP. So once you've found the peer and connected to it, all data goes directly between you.
Doesn't make it less/more P2P than any other P2P system out there.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean as p2p transport. What makes HTTP or IMAP not p2p in this description? (You find the peer out of band (DNS) and connect directly to the peer with the data.)
i'm pretty sure the parent is incorrect in describing TCP as a P2P protocol. TCP (like HTTP or IMAP) has strongly defined client and server roles, the two ends of the connection do not act as peers. P2P should mean that neither end of the connection is taking a specific role, there's no end that could really be classed as server or client.
Usually you'd divide what you're talking about into two different steps. Peer discovery, and peer transport.
Discovery is how you find other peers, sometimes its via DHT, sometimes it's hard-coded, other times just random walk. But just like in WebRTC, (and in TCP), you need to get the address from somewhere out of band, so you can connect, usually something like a centralized directory. But the transport of data, is P2P, just like TCP. So once you've found the peer and connected to it, all data goes directly between you.
Doesn't make it less/more P2P than any other P2P system out there.