Jeri: yes it can be irritating, this age old topic(I think I am probably older than you, so I've had this and allied discussions longer than you have!). But let's face it, this a forum for discussing folk and blues, isn't it? So if there is considerable difference in what different members mean by these terms, it has to be thrashed out every year or so, so people can say where they stand. Folk music is not unique in this respect: classical means different things to different people. And think of the concept of R'n'B now, and R'n'B in the 50's.
    It wouldn't half take the heat out of these arguments if people would realise that saying "Richard Thompson's latest song is not a folksong" is by no means the same as saying "Richard's Thompson's latest song is rubbish" or "Richard Thompson's latest song should be banned". There is no value judgement whatsoever in saying which song you think is folk and which isn't. In making a statement like that, people are merely applying definitions, surely a morally neutral position in this case.
I would finish by echoing Ian Anderson, fRoots mazine editor, who pointed out recently that the "purists" he knows are the people with the most eclectic record collections.