"You had an opportunity to educate and instead you chose to insult. "

Bingo!   That sums up the problem this community has.

We seem to spend more time with geeky arguements about semantics rather than spreading the gospel about the beauty and relevance of the music. It is little wonder that the public at large has a negative image of the particpants in this music.

No one is saying that you have to embrace Ani DiFranco. I'm not a big fan either, I think her music is largely inaccessible to casual listeners but I do see her influences and connections to the changing tradition. Yes, traditions do change. They are meant to be alive, not museum pieces. Let them call her a folksinger, it won't hurt any of us.

At the same time, I honestly do see the concern of people like Dick Greenhouse and Richard Bridges and I tend to agree with them - to a point.    If we are going to define folk, then do we need additional levels - sea chanties, Appalchian ballads, dance tunes, cowboy songs, coal mining songs, spirituals, etc? Do we really need to compartmentalize our music to such an extent in order to reach the public?   Supposing that Cecil Sharp came across a family of tuba playing Applachians during his travels - would he dismiss the music even if it met all the other criteria?   Collectors gather songs that live through the source - and modern times have changed the way we all live, and the way we create our art.