Molecatcher's Apprentice -- I was addressing the secondary definition that Ron Olesko gave

From th American Heritage Dictionary:
" 2.Contemporary music in the style of traditional folk music."

So, yes, to be considered "folk" by that definition would be to write songs in the style of traditional folk music.

Otherwise the songs are pleasant maybe even interesting examples of pop music, usually performed acoustically.

Will people still be singing them in 100 years? Or are they too personal to the singer-songwriter ever to be meaningfully performed by anyone else? Do you come away from the song humming it?

And I think what we are actually arguing about is whether a festival that excludes performers that actually perform traditional music and who do not write their own material should be labeled "folk" -- and I definitely agree with Don Firth; to call it folk is mislabeling and very much open to misinterpretation. I'm a firm believer in using language as precisely and clearly as possible. That's the point of communication. And if you lose words and nuances, the language is poorer for it.

Just my additional four cents' worth (inflation).

Linn