"or anyone else on this forum thinks of my singing and playing, or the feckin 1954 definition or any other crap, "
Doesn't stop us having an opinion of it Dick
You think 1954 iws crap - fine - you now my opinion of your singing - we're quits.
The problem with all of these arguments us that if I insisted that everybody must share my level of interest in folk or like the same things I like (I never have) there would be howls of "folk police" from the north to the south pole, yet, if I express an interest beyond just singing it or listening to it I am regularly met with much of the abuse present here "finger in ear", "purist", "intransigent", "narrow minded" and much, more more, sometime far worse.
What makes one attitude acceptable and the other not.   
Jim Bainbridge tells this story about Bob Davenport as if it was clever or even acceptable.
"First time I heard Bob Davenport in 1964(he's well known for plain speaking) a floor singer got up and spent fully 3 minutes explaining the song he was about to sing. Bob stood up and shouted from the back- 'Sing the fucking song man, stop talking about it'"
I saw behave like this a few years ago in the Musical Traditions Club, in this case, towards a young woman singer from The Aran Islands who had taken the trouble to give a brief explanation of her Irish language songs.
That is not "plain speaking" - it is downright folk fascism.
Again, why should Bob's behaviour be acceptable and the woman singer's not - Bob's a folkie star, I suppose?
There seems to be a graet deal of double standards afoot in today's folk world.
Jim Carroll