Bryan;
"Retracting the accusation that I was deliberately misrepresenting you is a good start"
You said I drew my conclusions mainly, if not completely, from SO'Ps suggestions – that is blatantly untrue.
I have been debating the state of clubs from the time I first found Mudcat, even when I posted as a guest.
During that time I have discussed what goes in the name of folk at clubs, whether standards should be applied to public performance, and if so, how they should be applied, whether audiences should be encouraged to sing along with solo performers uninvited, whether or not 'crib sheets' should be used, whether ballads are too long, whether an evening of folk songs is "boring"... a whole host of subjects to do with the running of folk clubs. During these discussions I have been told that standards should not be applied and are not only unnecessary, but are undesirable as they might put off the 'less talented', that audiences should be encouraged to join in with the singer, whose responsibility it should be to request that they don't (and if they made such a request, that is indicative of arrogance – I think the term was – "the must think they are better than the rest of us").
One of the underlying suggestions throughout was that if you are required to 'work' at singing you cease to enjoy it.
These discussions were all a year or so before Sean Sweeney, (sorry Sean, sometimes these forum names make me feel as if I am part of Noddy in Toyland) and I went head to head. Sean and my differences are relatively new on the scene. I use Sean's list because, it is, I believe, a fairly representative sample of what goes on in some folk clubs, from my own experience (now limited, admittedly) and from many arguments put up by others on this forum – trawl though some of the threads and they are all there for the looking. So it was grossly misleading to suggest that my conclusions came either solely or mainly from Sean.
While we're here, perhaps I can add something else about Sean and my differences. My arguments with him have been long and bitter not because I don't respect him; on the contrary. He, compared to most people I have disagreed with on the definition of folk song, is one of the few who have attempted to take the existing definition and suggest a workable alternative. I disagree completely with his conclusions and I find his (IMO) dismissive manner irritating, often infuriating and have reacted badly on occasion, but at least he has never relied on the Humpty Dumpty philosophy of "Words mean what I want them to mean"; for that at least, he has my admiration.

"and you, whose opinion does matter...."
Why should my opinions matter any more than anyone else's? As you have pointed out, my experience of clubs is now limited since we "swanned off to Ireland"(which apparently bars me from holding an opinion on English clubs, it would seem).

"Feels like blame if you are on the receiving end."
My arguments are based around your statement that the basic requirement for encouraging anybody to sing is that they should "want to"; a statement I disagree with entirely. You have chosen to take this as a personal attack and one on your club; I remind you again that it was you who dragged your club into it by stating it was their official policy. My argument is solely aimed at the statement, which I believe, if applied widely, would damage any club that adopted it. You say that you don't get bad singers, so your recommendation is aimed at other clubs, not your own, which makes it more damaging to my mind.

"I can't recall you acknowledging that there were....." (any good clubs)
Then this seems like a case of 'voluntary dyslexia' on your part. I have constantly acknowledged that there are good clubs and included your own in that acknowledgment; I question whether there are enough of them to continue to present folk song so that future generations can continue to enjoy it as we did.

"Why do you brush aside the evidence of me, Dick Miles, Brian Peters and many others"
I don't brush aside their/your evidence, but I consider it alongside all the other information available; through friends still involved (some of whom have become disillusioned with the scene and are considering dropping out), through this forum, through what I've read and heard elsewhere and through my own experience, fairly extensive in the past (up to ten years ago), and less often more recently. Isn't that what you would do if our positions were reversed?
Some time ago you suggested my attitude was based on hearsay evidence – why should I accept your statements, which are hearsay evidence to me, above that of others?   

"while giving so much credence to SO'P's discredited statements....."
Are his statements discredited? There is enough evidence from this forum (from this thread even) that suggests that what he has claimed applies elsewhere. It seems that dismissing him out of hand shows disrespect for him on your part, not mine.

".....They will do that of their own volition not because someone like me is standing over them telling them to do so"
Who has ever suggested that anybody should be 'stood over'?
MacColl, above all singers, was the one who insisted that the work be put in before anybody stood up in front of an audience; his contribution, far from being an empty statement, was to help it to happen. He set up The Critics Group at the request of singers who needed help. He did not tell them to go off and practice in public at folk clubs, but devised a method of work which he believed would assist them improve their singing. I was involved in singing workshops based roughly on the 'self-help' principle he devised for more than 20 years from 1968 to the demise of The London Singers Workshop.

"My experience bears this out."
My experience has always been that new singers readily accept assistance if it is tactfully and sincerely offered. It also suggests that people thrown in at the deep-end without assistance are more likely to be put off than to be encouraged to become better singers. 'Standing over them' is a loaded and extremely misleading term is 'turning them away' which you have used in the past.

"At the Lewes Saturday Folk Club, we have quite a large core of residents all of whom perform traditional or "in the tradition" songs and music."
So you have said and so I believe.

" We have many regular floorsingers who share the same philosophy, Perhaps not all of them achieve it but nobody is unlistenable."
Once again, lucky old you – what about the club members on this thread who have claimed the opposite; me included; did we/they make it up?
Where does making 'wanting to sing' a basic requirement fit in with all this? 'Wanting to' is only a start to being able to – it's than that you put the work in.

This has again been far longer than I intended; while I fully intend to respond to things I disagree with and distortions of my opinion; I really don't want to be part of a discussion of this sort with you, interminably going over old ground again. If you cannot accept my views in the spirit they are offered, I have asked that we agree to differ rather than foul up worthwhile threads with our eternal bickering - I hope you will respect that request.
Jim Carroll