You might need more compelling logic than an indefinable something before anyone gets to ringfence music definitions for the rest of us.

On the contrary, I think the fact that a definition which was formulated 55 years ago - some time before I was born - works for me now, in the sense of being a reasonably good guide to music I enjoy, is a very good reason to retain it. It's not a value judgment, just a suggestion that one thing is not like another thing.

The campaign about how awful UK folk clubs are seems to be lead by people who remember how bad it was thirty years ago and have rarely been in a folk club since. The scene they describe bears no resemblance to the scene I know in the 21st century.

For what it's worth, my main point of reference is a folk club that was founded less than ten years ago, and pitched towards singer-songwriters right from the off (the MC sings his own stuff, which is mostly in a C&W style; very good stuff, incidentally, but quite a long way from trad). I haven't been back much recently, but the last time I went it was packed to the rafters - so many performers that we were down to one song each - and I reckon about 1 song in 10 was traditional. Not all singer-songwriter stuff - some Beatles, some Radiohead, some George Formby. It was a good night in its way - certainly never a dull moment.

Snail, it sounds as if the "anything goes in a folk club" problem* - like the "can't be bothered to learn" problem - isn't one that your club encounters much. Maybe when Jim gets back from his hols we can restart this discussion on an Asking Bryan How He Does It thread. Or maybe not.

*Yes, I realise not everyone thinks it's a problem. Not everyone's typing this comment.