Actually having people leave - that's the reintroduction of something that generally faded away over time inhistory, hence an "innovation." I suspect it is not a diocesan wide sanctioned act.
Orthodoxy is conservative and preserves much of its history, but it's not static. Everything old is NOT new again necessarily.
If an innovation is innovated was the original innovation still an innovation?
If an innovation is left alone, is it no longer an innovation? How many years does it take for an innovation to no longer be an innovation? You have to answer this that question if you want to keep that argument. What decides the time frame for something to no longer be an innovation?
Arguing that anything that is different is an innovation does not make much sense if it is about an innovation in the first place. Are monasteries innovating when they dismiss catechumen? you have just argued that dismissing catechumen is an innovation
When something is lost, that does not mean you cannot got back because of fear of imaginary innovation? When the renovationist bishops in Russia were around, people did not stick with the wonderful innovations after they were gone because of saying it is "innovation" to go back after this "no longer an innovation innovation" crept in.
I do not believe that stopping innovation is innovation