It doesn't have to be at Wikipedia, it could be any sort of Creative Commons licensed, open source RDBMS (relational database management system) site where anyone with some basic expertise could add, edit, etc. to maintain a CURRENT AND ACCURATE database and archive. You could download Art Thieme or Jean Ritchie or Frank Hamilton performing the DT tunes, if they are willing to do the performing, and want you to have access to it.

There is just so much MORE that this music resource could be.

Such a site would allow us to draw on the expertise of the many, rather than have what little is here being guarded by a select few.

It is, after all, the people's music.

With such an open source, anyone can access and update the database (for those World Series/World Cup topical songs!), folks with bug fixing expertise come in and fix your bugs, freeing the musicians with content expertise to do the data mining, relational database management, etc.

There are many different software systems and approaches to consider, and that ain't my area of expertise. It also isn't Max & Dick's apparently.

But it should be if the online folk and blues music community is serious about turning the DT/Mudcat archive into something that reasonably resembles an online music archive in the 21st century.

Look, I'm a luddite when it comes to this stuff. But if I know at least this small amount about the POSSIBILITES, w/open source licensing, databases, podcasting, etc, why don't we hear anyone around here talking about making DT & the Mudcat archive great, rather than cumbersome, outdated, and mediocre?

Why aren't all of you demanding the DT & Mudcat archive be made BETTER AND MORE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL???

Why settle for this bogus forum politics crap, when the sky is the limit?