"If non members decide to attend a unknown club because they have an interest in a paid guest performer that is fine. They paid to see the guest. They got their monies worth. This does not give them the right to complain about the abilities and performances of any member of that club taking up other floor spots."

This is one of the most interesting posts I've ever seen on the internet.

It is obviously passionately believed and for myself I can understand why. I do understand and support those who champion the idea that things like passion, participation, personal development, repertoire, and story can and often do outweigh musical ability and presentation.

But bad experience can easily outweigh good. Will people really feel they've got their money's worth if they've spent nearly half the evening being, err shall we just say, a bit uncomfortable?

It's hard to get people away from telly and merlot at the best of times.

As someone who attracts people to my mailing list from folk clubs and non-folk venues such as village halls in equal numbers, I have a particular problem.

The folk club people will not pay to see me in a non folk venue (plus some want a chance to sing or play themselves).

The non-folk people will come not come to see me in a folk club because they are not comfortable there (for various reasons, with floor spots at the top, they tell me).

Result: plenty of fans, but not enough will turn out at either gig for the job to work.

End result: not possible to be a full-time musician.

Now, Virginia Tam, you may think that's not a problem - quite a few of the people posting on this thread as it happens think 'good riddance' :-) but those people on my mailing list are quite unhappy about it.

I don't want clubs to change. But I want people like me to be able to go on doing it for real.

Is there anything we can do?

Tom