After Jim's eloquent post anyone who comes after is in a 'follow that!' situation. Nevertheless, I suspect that a lot of the 'heat' in these arguments has historical roots in the nature of the Folk Club Movement of the 1960s and 70s. This Movement tended to be highly democratic and inclusive (with possible exceptions - which I'm sure someone will remind me of). At any rate the clubs provided a platform for experienced and budding folk singers and musicians. This inclusiveness was also a weakness - which eventually led to the 'any-old-crap-will-do' mentality which is all too prevalent today (see the 'Folk Club Manners' thread). It also led artists and agents to realise that here was a ready-made and accessible platform for people who were struggling to find outlets for their talents elsewhere. Hence the folk clubs began to feature comedians, singer songwriters, guitarists and others. It eventually reached a stage where some folk clubs rarely, if ever, featured any folk music! In some parts of the country the clubs had been 'hi-jacked'! I think that when those of us who were interested in traditional music and song began to complain about this situation is when the trouble started. That's when labels such as 'folk police' started to be bandied about and assertions that 'all music's folk music' became common.