Er, bollocks. The best means of preservation is not in the minds of the people. The best way to preserve something is to write it down or record it.

If you're advocating preserving songs in the minds of people, the songs will change over time. Different singers will add to them, subtract from them, seek to improve them or possibly just not remember the words or music accurately. Thus you end up with several slightly different versions of the same song. It called human nature and the process I've just described is called the folk tradition, about which you clearly know jack shit. Folk music isn't about preservation, it's by its very nature somthing that is continually changing and reinventing itself. That's how it's survived.

As for the idea that the folk circuit exercises censorship over non-entertaining performers - what planet are you on? Over the years I've seen utterly execrable performers who can't remember the words, who sing out of tune and who have all the charisma and stage presence of a road accident. These people have got up as floor spots, massacred a couple of traditional songs and been rewarded with polite applause. This wouldn't happent ON ANY OTHER CIRCUIT!

I don't care if you're a piss artist. I'm fond of a tipple myself. I also don't care if you think that I (as a professional musician) am a parasite leeching the life blood from the tradition. That's your opinion and as Voltaire said 'I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it'. But I do care about factual accuracy and I've struggled to find any in anything that you've said.

I await your response with interest.