"Me, I'm formly wedded to the idea that wrds have meanings, and teh more accurate they are thenthe clearer communication is."

That really tickled me.

p.s.

"Why is reggae not ragga?" - its the other way round, ragga is a dancehall form of reggae with intros/ chat etc. from a DJ. So if you like, ragga is a form or reggae, but not all reggae is ragga.

Why is not all rap hip-hop? - rap is hip-hop, but not all hip-hop is rap, instrumental breakbeat type music is still hip-hop but there is no rapping, so it isn't called rap.

But I'm guessing you didn't really want to know any of that?

I believe the difference is, with Reggae/Ragga/Ska/Rocksteady or with Rap/Hip-Hop people are generally using the definitions to describe songs and styles and convey to somebody how something sounds. I think this is a good reason for having definitions and knowing what different musical styles are called.

HOWEVER, it seems to me that on this forum, the only reason people ever want to define 'folk' is to decide which acts can be excluded from the genre, as opposed to helping to describe/define different styles or preferences within the genre. This, in my opinion, is a negative reason for having a definition, and why I am no longer interested in the definition debate.

I think the need to define 'folk' and use it to exclude certain artists is because people want to guard something which they feel is their own, and perceive that defining it very strictly will allow them to do just that. I can understand how this situation has developed, but I do not agree with it.